(Washington, D.C.) Speaker of the House J. Dennis Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist released the following statement today:

“We’re pleased to announce that we have reached an agreement on legislation which provides an opportunity to save Mrs. Schiavo’s life. This legislation will allow a federal district judge to consider a claim by or on behalf of Mrs. Schiavo for alleged violations of Constitutional rights or federal laws relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life. We want to thank Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid for working with us towards a legislative solution. The House and Senate will act as quickly as possible to send this legislation to the President for his signature.

“The Senate will meet today at 5:00 p.m. to pass an adjournment. Passing an adjournment resolution will enable us to bring both the House and Senate back into session under our emergency powers. The House will meet at 1:00pm on Sunday, March 20th in the hope of receiving unanimous consent to take up the measure. If unanimous consent cannot be attained, the measure will be considered on the House Suspension Calendar as early as 12:01 a.m. Monday, March 21. The Senate will continue to work through the weekend to ensure the bill can be passed shortly after the House has acted.”

I am here to announce that House and Senate negotiators have agreed to the outlines of a bi-partisan, bi-cameral compromise bill to save Terri Schiavo.

As you know, the Senate will come into extraordinary session around five o'clock this afternoon to pass an adjournment resolution.

Once that resolution is passed in the Senate, Speaker Hastert is empowered to call the House back into emergency session, which he will do tomorrow afternoon - Palm Sunday - at one o'clock.

This proposed compromise, as I said, is bi-partisan and bi-cameral.

Negotiations have never stopped, and we think we have found a solution.

It is very similar to the bill passed in the Senate Thursday, with some modest modifications.

We have been in frequent contact throughout the day with leaders in both houses and on both sides of the aisle to find a solution to this situation.

I have personally been in contact with several House Democrats who are now working their caucus to explain and build momentum for this compromise measure, and Senator Reid has been helpful doing the same in the Senate.

This is not over, but this compromise has cut across every division in Congress, and all sides agree it is the best way to proceed.

We are confident this compromise addresses everyone's concerns, we are confident it will provide Mrs. Schiavo a clear and appropriate avenue for appeal in federal court, and most importantly, we are confident this compromise will restore nutrition and hydration to Mrs. Schiavo as long as that appeal endures.

A modern myth, which is unfortunately gaining circulation even around this wise Corner, is the idea that you cannot have economic growth without an increase in population, a proposition which would have been dodgy in, say, the 13th Century and, in an age where it is machines, not men that do much of the work, looks very difficult to sustain indeed.

Needless to say, a new report from the EU Commission, a bureaucracy that has always had its problems with wealth creation, has now endorsed this myth. The suggested solutions? More immigration (which has, for Brussels, the added advantage of diluting that stubborn sense of national identity that the Eurocrats so disdain) and, incredibly, even more of the workplace regulation (on this occasion supposedly designed to make it easier for young mothers to combine parenting and employment) that has so hit the economic productivity that is the real key to providing for an ageing continent’s financial future.

Oh dear.

Marc Spindelman, a visiting professor of law at Georgetown University who specializes in bioethics, said the message sent by the subpoenas is chilling.

"What's next? If Congress doesn't like it, are they going to subpoena individual women to testify before Congress in order to keep them from exercising their rights to an abortion?" he said. "What about individuals who want to terminate a respirator? Is Congress going to bring them in and start asking them questions? Who couldn't be dissuaded from exercising their constitutional rights in certain ways in the face of a federal subpoena? The spectacle of this--it's unbelievable."

The Derb wrote the other day how he many of his (fellow) Americans could not understand the dislike he felt for Tony Blair. I come across the same thing myself. Well, here’s one example of the way in which this most repulsive of prime ministers (his putative replacement, Britain’s twitchy nutcase of a finance minister, weird Gordon Brown, would be even worse however) operates, an example that shows rather well the sort of man that he is.

Britain is about to go through an election campaign. Notwithstanding a few freak polls, the unlovely, hopeless and rather disgusting (but better-than-Blair) Tories have no chance of winning. Despite that, there seems to be little in the way of limit to the depths to which Blair will descend in order to win a vote or two. On Thursday he and the oddball Brown posed in front of a poster that claimed that the Tories were planning some $70bn in cuts from public services, a claim so dishonest that even the BBC reporter who was there objected.

In fact, all that the Tories are planning to do (more’s the pity) is reduce the rate of increase in spending on those services from five per cent a year (Labour’s plans) to four percent.

That’s not a cut, Mr. Blair. And you, Mr. Blair, are a liar.

The process of starving to death seems very barbaric but in actuality is very peaceful," said Dr. Fred Mirarchi, assistant clinical professor of emergency medicine at Drexel University College of Medicine in Philadelphia.

Whereas technology was supposed to render the battlefield transparent, the "fog of war" settled over Iraq like a suffocating blanket. Never have U.S. forces fought in such ignorance of the enemy's purpose, strength, leadership and order of battle. George Armstrong Custer knew more about the warriors he faced in 1876 than U.S. commanders today know about their adversaries.

Whereas precision weapons were supposedly making error, waste and collateral damage a thing of the past, the fight to control Iraqi cities has given the past a new life. Comparisons between the "liberation" of Fallujah and the Marines' assault on Hue in 1968 are only too apt. In both cases, victory was gained the old-fashioned way: through brute force.

Toppling Saddam Hussein opened a Pandora's box of unanticipated complications. Whether it was attacks on oil pipelines or insurgents infiltrating into the new Iraqi security forces, events time and again caught U.S. officials flat-footed. Even success proves transitory, with yesterday's apparent accomplishment becoming unglued today.

To which anyone with even a passing knowledge of history would reply: of course. This is what war has always been -- grueling, filthy, confusing, replete with accidents and miscues that victimize the innocent, giving rise to unforeseen consequences and loose ends.

A few weeks ago, l’escroc Jacques Chirac, a man who has never found a rule he could not bend, decided to advance the date for a French referendum on the EU ‘constitution’. His motive? Support for the yes camp was leaking away fast, something that brought back unhappy memories of an earlier French referendum – on the EU’s Maastricht treaty a decade or so ago. That campaign too began with a heavy lead for those who supported the treaty, but in the event the yes side only won in a photofinish and in somewhat suspicious circumstances. By pushing the vote forward to May 29th, Chirac hoped to avoid a similar close shave this time round.

There are encouraging signs that this gambit may fail. For the first time, the no’s are ahead.

This makes sense. After Mitterand and Chirac the French should know moral and financial corruption when they see it. With a bit of luck therefore, they ought to understand the disastrous consequences to them of handing the keys of their coffers to the kleptocrats of Brussels in perpetuity.

If the French have any sense, this time they should just say non.

New Ukrainian president Victor Yushchenko will be visiting Washington in April. That’s good news. As the winner of an election that may represent a truly remarkable extension of democracy in a part of the world where freedom and the rule of law have been all too rare, and all too needed, an election which seems to be acting as an inspiration to other peoples from Lebanon to Kirkizstan, it would seem natural that Yushchenko should also be invited to speak to a joint session of Congress. Weirdly, House Speaker Hastert has not got round to asking him.

Perhaps he felt legislators had more important things to do.

Such as holding hearings on baseball.

Ridiculous.

Yesterday’s link to Gerard Baker’s fine piece on the McCartney sisters brought this response from one reader:

“I appreciate your linking to Baker's column today. For all non-Times reading NRO devotees who may be unaware of Baker's always compelling columns, I urge you to link to this recent phenomenal piece by Baker headlined, "What have the Americans ever done for us? Liberated 50 million people…"

Delighted to oblige. Check it out here.

Michael Schiavo’s attorney, George Felos, is mistaken. As the Republican Conference Chairman, Senator Santorum, has said, there was “broad opposition” to the House legislation on both sides of the Senate aisle. I objected to legislation regarding Terri Schiavo only long enough to resolve the concerns I have stated in the Congressional record. I worked with the bipartisan leadership so the Senate could vote on the bill in record time. I was assured by the Republican leadership of the Senate that the Senate legislation would be accepted by the House.

I was wandering down a bright, but chilly Birgerjarlsgatan today with three American friends and we had the, um, pleasure of running into a dim, but heated anti-American demonstration seemingly organized by the Left Party (the former communists). Interesting range of slogans on display including calls for an end to the "occupations" of Palestine and Iraq. No word, however, on the Syrian occupation of Lebanon.

Funny, that.

Joint Statement of Speaker of the House J. Dennis Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist Congress to Work Through Weekend to Save Mrs. Schiavo’s Life

(Washington, D.C.) Speaker of the House J. Dennis Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist released the following statement today:

“We’re very disappointed by the Florida court’s decision to allow Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube to be removed. The House and Senate leadership are committed to reaching agreement on legislation that provides an opportunity to save Mrs. Schiavo’s life. Now that the House and Senate have each passed different legislative remedies, the House and Senate Committees are working urgently together. We will be working through the weekend to resolve the differences and reach an effective solution that can clear our chambers and be signed by the President.”

OK. I've reached total saturation here.

Been on the Corner since it started, but I'm Schiavo'ed all the way out. Not coming back until it's not in every post in my browser window, or almost every post. 11 posts in the window, 10 are Schiavo related.

I support the idea behind the "right to die" but only if there is a definitive prior indication that the individual has made that choice should the situation arise (i.e. a witnessed signed statement). I've become more pro-life over the years though not full-on quite yet (I think it should be about as rare as I think the death penalty should be, which is extremely limited). But, on the word of a husband that has already moved on and in light of the other facts in the case? Forget it, this one shouldn't even be close. Whoever pulls those tubes is committing murder. And the husband and courts are accessories.

The Federal Gov't should not be deciding the specific case of Schiavo.

If they had really cared they could have passed legislation about this in the past seven years. It never came up, because everyone in Congress knew it was not their role.

Every court case that gets decided in a wrong or immoral manner does not get to go to the US Congress for appeal. Yes it is a matter of life or death but this is not for Congress to intervene in.

This sets a precedent in which every family with someone on death row can bring their case to Congress.

If this was the case you would've died of a brain explosion during the early Clinton years.

Congress does not get special rights when you happen to agree with the party in power.

Whatever happened to the sanctity of marriage your party has championed at the expense of homosexuals wanting to marry? Schiavo's husband is straight, right? They ARE married, right? So... where exactly is your leg to stand on?

You all are shameful- really, really shameful.

Count me as a "Schwarzenegger Republican" who's mostly in favor of abortion rights (though not Roe v. Wade), who's very disturbed by the Schiavo case.

You are right that this is a terrible story, but not for the reasons that you are espousing. It is terrible whenever a tremendously sad situation gets blown into a circus. The circus atmosphere that accompanied the matter in 2003 and over the past two days is sad. What is lost in this whole matter is that there are two sides to Terri's case, with no winners and no losers. (I have no opinion one way or the other on Terri and the feeding tube removal, by the way.)

While much has been said about Terri's family and their efforts to allow her to live, very little has been said about her husband and what he has been going through. He is depicted -- either explicitly or by implication -- as an uncaring person who, for selfish reasons, wants to be rid of his burdensome wife. I cannot see into the husband's "heart of hearts" so I will give him the benefit of the doubt: that he agonized over this decision for nine years before making the decision to go ahead with the petition, asserting that Terri would have wanted this, to have the feeding withheld. As a husband and father, I cannot begin to fathom the depths of despair and agony I would endure if I had to make a similar decision for my wife or son. This type of decision would be hell on earth.

I am well aware of the response -- that while it may be "hell on earth" for the decision-maker, it is death for the wife/son/Terri. This is true and merely highlights that there are no winners in this situation. But neither is there a moral high ground. I do not know what process of a hearing or trial that Terri's husband and her family went through that led to the court decision to allow removal of the feeding tube; I can only assume that there was such a hearing, that both sides had an opportunity to present their respective cases and that a fair-minded intelligent judge made a decision, which could then be appealed by the losing side.

That is the where the matter should end. But it didn't. Whether because of the family or the press, or a combination of the two, a circus arose. Jeb Bush got involved, the Florida legislature got involved. And now, Congress got involved. And, to top off the whole thing, Terri's parents are going to be on Larry King tonight. No doubt they will villify the courts, the husband, etc., and will try to increase public sympathy to get the feeding restarted.

Do you truly believe that Congress and Larry King care about this poor woman? Don't kid yourself. This is grandstanding just like the baseball steroid hearings were (Rep. Davis gets a twofer). Congressmen and senators are using Terri. Larry King just wants ratings.

And the parents? They sound like they are in denial about their daughter's condition. Are they caring people? They truly care about their daughter, that much is true. But what about their son-in-law? They obviously don't mind 1) publicizing a sad, private matter; and 2) depriving him of his privacy. Let's assume he wants to get on with his life? The press will descend on him if he ever tries to get married. Is that fair? He never asked for this.

I may agree with you on your political views, but I think you are just as much to blame for this circus.

Kathryn:

Don't know if you saw my earlier e-mail about the circus, but Congress's actions are revolting.

The misuse of subpoenas to try to keep Terri from being harmed is disgusting and inappropriate. Funny, but I seem to recall a lot of complaints this week about Davis and Waxman misusing their incredibly-broad subpoena power to grandstand with baseball and steroids, and how that was a waste of tax money. Seems to me the same argument has to apply here.

John Miller's rhetorical question appeals to the lowest common denominator and implies that her husband and the courts -- the objective bastion in our civilized world -- are murderers or complicit in a murder. This type of hyperbole just ignores that 1) this young lady has suffered a severe, conscious-depriving accident; and 2) that this accident has deprived her parents of a daughter and her husband of a wife.



Can't you just display an ounce of compassion? You are acting like a zealot rather than an intelligent person.

So where's the outcry on the Corner urging action on the genocide in Darfur? "Culture of Life," indeed. I guess Darfur just isn't a good occasion for sanctimonious grandstanding. Truly pathetic.

WASHINGTON - House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) today condemned the removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube and pledged to continue working for a legal or legislative means to save her life.

"Right now, murder is being committed against a defenseless American citizen in Florida," DeLay said. "Terri Schiavo's feeding tube should be immediately replaced, and Congress will continue working to explore ways to save her.

"Mrs. Schiavo's life is not slipping away - it is being violently wrenched from her body in an act of medical terrorism," DeLay said. "Mr. Schiavo's attorney's characterization of the premeditated starvation and dehydration of a helpless woman as 'her dying process' is as disturbing as it is unacceptable. What is happening to her is not compassion - it is homicide. She doesn't need to die, and as long as Terri Schiavo can breathe and her supporters can pray, we will not rest."

I asked Boxer if events in Lebanon and Egypt had changed her views. “History will judge,” she said, but added that in Lebanon “the streets are flooded with protesters today”—a reference to the Hezbollah-sponsored pro-Syria demonstration—“and you wonder if maybe a little quiet diplomacy there might have produced better results.”

The Dutch High Court awarded damages on Friday to a severely handicapped 11-year-old girl because medics would not test for a genetic defect before her birth, despite her mother's request.

Court documents show the ruling in the "Baby Kelly" case makes the Netherlands the second European country after France to award compensation in a so-called wrongful life case.

The documents say the mother had asked doctors to examine the fetus because of serious genetic defects present in the father's side of the family, which, if detected, would have prompted the mother to abort the baby.

WASHINGTON - House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) today delivered the following remarks at a press availability on the House of Representatives' efforts to save the life of Terri Schiavo.

"It is now one o'clock on the East Coast, the time preordained by a Florida state judge to allow for denial of food and water to Terri Schiavo. This act of barbarism can be, and must be, prevented. The Senate has before it the Protection of Incapacitated Persons Act of 2005. This bill is the right thing to do. Unfortunately, they have chosen to adjourn rather than pass it.

"Those senators responsible for blocking the bill yesterday afternoon, Senators Boxer, Wyden, and Levin, have put Mrs. Schiavo's life at risk to prove a point - an unprecedented profile in cowardice. The American people are not interested in squabbles between Republicans and Democrats, or between the House and Senate. They care, and we care, about saving Terri Schiavo's life. The House bill will do that.

"Terri Schiavo is alive. She is not 'barely alive.' She is not 'being kept alive.' She is as alive as you or I, and as such we have a moral obligation to protect and defend her from the fate premeditated by the Florida courts. This is not over. We are still working, so are Mrs. Schiavo's lawyers, and so is the Florida state legislature. This is not over.

"To friends, family, and millions of people praying around the world this Palm Sunday weekend: do not be afraid. Terri Schiavo will not be forsaken."

I completely agree with the husband of Terri Schiavo...you don't know about persistent vegetative states until your loved one is in that state. My [spouse] developed a persistent vegetative state about 1.5 years ago, and [our family] agreed it was most important to not let [my spouse] linger...it only tortures you the most. Let the woman die!

This sentiment is understandable, but I think it misses the point. Based on what we know about the case, there is abundant reason to doubt that Terri Schiavo is actually in a persistent vegetative state. If, upon a judicial review, hopefully including a more searching and objective examination, it turns out that she is a PVS case, this becomes a much stronger case for the husband. For many of us, it would still be critical that a reviewing court affirm the state court finding that Terri actually expressed a desire not to have sustaining treatment. But what we are principally arguing here is that, before a decision is made that will result in death (particularly an agonizing death), we should be reasonably certain both that she is actually in a PVS and that she personally did not want sustaining measures – not that a self-interested person has deduced that she would have wanted it that way.

If those things were established – especially by testing, like an MRI, that is evidently standard in PVS cases but has not, for some reason, been done in this case, then my lips are sealed.

But imagine if some state tried to pass a law that said: “a sentence of death may be imposed after the offense of murder has been established by something less than proof-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt, and the said sentence is not subject to review by federal courts to determine whether fundamental federal rights were violated in the state trial proceedings.” Americans would be profoundly offended by such a law, as well they should be. Yet, that is pretty much what Florida has done here: even though this is life-and-death, the facts of the Schiavo case have not been determined on our highest standard of proof and the case has not been reviewed to ensure that there has been no violation of federal law.

Conservatives also seem troubled by the federalism aspects of this case. Such concerns are natural but they are overwrought here. A federal court is not going to be able to reverse the Florida rulings here absent a showing that some recognized federal right (such as the right not to be deprived of life without due process of law under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments). If a federal court were, for example, satisfied that the state proceedings complied with applicable due process standards (which tend not to be terribly demanding), it would not be empowered to reverse the Florida courts simply because it would have decided the case another way.

Bill Frist and Tom DeLay and Jim Sensenbrenner and Denny Hastert and all the rest would be better off risking looking ridiculous and flying down to Florida, standing outside Terri Schiavo's room and physically restraining the poor harassed staff who may be told soon to remove her feeding tube, than standing by in Washington, helpless and tied in legislative knots, and doing nothing.

SEC. 7. NO EFFECT ON ASSISTING SUICIDE.

Nothing is this Act shall be construed to confer additional jurisdiction on any court to consider any claim related--

(1) to assisting suicide, or

(2) a State law regarding assisting suicide.

Writing in the London Times, Gerard Baker has plenty to say, little of it complimentary, about the sudden change of mind by certain US politicians over Gerry Adams. Here’s an extract:

”The McCartney horror is not, as the word now has it on the streets of New York and Boston, some startling revelation of the way these men behave, not some grisly departure from the honourable Irish fight for freedom. It merely confirms what most decent Irish have known about the IRA for years. So let me answer my own questions. The tragedy heaped on the McCartney family and the brave stand of the McCartney sisters have not opened the eyes of Irish-American leaders to the horror of the IRA. They have not even shamed these leaders. They have merely made them start to worry about the political expediency of being seen alongside men whose own standing has suddenly dropped sharply. Where the McCartney sisters display true leadership, in the face of the gravest peril, the Irish American chiefs step heroically into line. So in many ways yesterday’s spectacle of Adams being snubbed at the White House and on parts of Capitol Hill, being sternly lectured to by Ted Kennedy and Representative Peter King (a longstanding apologist for Sinn Fein) and others, is even more nauseating than the one we used to watch at the White House each year. Irish America’s leaders, in other words, are showing exactly the same level of courage as they demonstrated when they looked away for 20 years or more as their supporters dropped $100 bills into the collection buckets so that the IRA could buy the guns and the Semtex that would kill and maim thousands of innocents at a nice safe distance of thousands of miles away.”

Food for thought, I think.

SEC. 8. NO PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE LEGISLATION.

Nothing is this Act shall constitute a precedent with respect to future legislation.

All f these bills went through House Judiciary under Chairman Sensenbrenner and became law. H.R.867 Title: Private Bill; For the relief of Durreshahwar Durreshahwar, Nida Hasan, Asna Hasan, Anum Hasan, and Iqra Hasan. Sponsor: Rep Holt, Rush D. [D-NJ-12] (introduced 2/13/2003) Committees: House Judiciary; Senate Judiciary House Reports: 108-531 Latest Major Action: 10/30/2004 Became Private Law No: 108-4.

H.R.530 Title: Private Bill; For the relief of Tanya Andrea Goudeau. Sponsor: Rep Baker, Richard H. [R-LA-6] (introduced 2/4/2003) Committees: House Judiciary; Senate Judiciary House Reports: 108-529 Latest Major Action: 12/23/2004 Became Private Law No: 108-6.

S.560 Title: Private Bill; A bill for the relief of Rita Mirembe Revell (a.k.a. Margaret Rita Mirembe). Sponsor: Sen Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] (introduced 3/19/2001) Committees: Senate Judiciary; House Judiciary House Reports: 107-129 Latest Major Action: 7/17/2001 Became Private Law No: 107-1.

S.1834 Title: Private Bill; A bill for the relief of retired Sergeant First Class James D. Benoit and Wan Sook Benoit. Sponsor: Sen Levin, Carl [D-MI] (introduced 12/14/2001) Cosponsors: (none) Committees: Senate Judiciary; House Judiciary House Reports: 107-578 Latest Major Action: 10/1/2002 Became Private Law No: 107-2.

H.R.486 Title: Private Bill; For the relief of Barbara Makuch. Sponsor: Rep Reynolds, Thomas M. [R-NY-27] (introduced 2/6/2001) Cosponsors: (none) Committees: House Judiciary; Senate Judiciary House Reports: 107-445 Latest Major Action: 10/4/2002 Became Private Law No: 107-3.

H.R.487 Title: Private Bill; For the relief of Eugene Makuch. Sponsor: Rep Reynolds, Thomas M. [R-NY-27] (introduced 2/6/2001) Cosponsors: (none) Committees: House Judiciary; Senate Judiciary House Reports: 107-446 Latest Major Action: 10/4/2002 Became Private Law No: 107-4.

H.R.2245 Title: Private Bill; For the relief of Anisha Goveas Foti. Sponsor: Rep Lantos, Tom [D-CA-12] (introduced 6/19/2001) Committees: House Judiciary; Senate Judiciary House Reports: 107-579 Latest Major Action: 11/5/2002 Became Private Law No: 107-5.

H.R.3758 Major Actions: Help Title: Private Bill; For the relief of So Hyun Jun. Sponsor: Rep McCrery, Jim [R-LA-4] (introduced 2/13/2002) Committees: House Judiciary House Reports: 107-729 Latest Major Action: 12/2/2002 Became Private Law No: 107-6.

For years, thoughtful people have argued that "reasons for taking a human life" should not be treated as a growing list. There are valid reasons to do it, and they have been agreed for millennia. If the list has to change, better to shorten than lengthen it.

Thoughtful people have argued: Once you start footnoting innocent human life, you are in trouble. Innocent life must not be taken . . . unless (here come the footnotes) the subject is too small, sick, or depressed to complain. One footnote, people have argued, and the jig is up; in the long run the accumulating footnotes will strangle humane society like algae choking a pond.

Who would have believed when the Supreme Court legalized abortion that, one generation later, only one, America would have come to this? Mrs. Schiavo's parents wanting her to live, pleading for her to live, the state saying no, and a meeting of the legislature required to pry the executioner's fingers from the victim's throat?...

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, M.D. (R-TN) today made the following statement:

"The Senate and the House remain dedicated to saving Terri Schiavo's life. While discussions over possible legislative remedies continue, the Senate and the House are taking action to keep her alive in the interim."

HELP Committee Chairman Mike Enzi has requested the presence of Mr. and Mrs. Schiavo at an official committee hearing. He has sent a letter to the Schiavos to appear at a hearing on Monday, March 28, 2005 regarding "Health Care Provided to Non-ambulatory Persons." The purpose of the hearing is to review health care policies and practices relevant to the care of non-ambulatory persons such as Mrs. Schiavo.

Federal criminal law protects witnesses called before official Congressional committee proceedings from anyone who may obstruct or impede a witness' attendance or testimony. More specifically, the law protects a witness from anyone who -- by threats, force, or by any threatening letter or communication --influences, obstructs, or impedes an inquiry or investigation by Congress. Anyone who violates this law is subject to criminal fines and imprisonment.

The e-mail is still pouring (but not purring) in. For example:

Wonderously-reasoned piece. Brilliant insight. What a mind! Ever hear of RATS, you moron?

Ever have to peel birds**t off your car, house, sidewalk,mailbox, shirt? Ever have to climb on a roof and dig birdnests out of your chimney? Ever have to pay a grand to have a dead squirrel dislodged from the bottom of a vent pipe - which has backed up your entire plumbing system and flooded your house? (Oh, wait. You didn't even TOUCH on the havoc cats play on the SQUIRREL population, or address how many bird deaths may be attributed to squirrels every year.)

How about kids with slingshots and BB guns? Open season?

How about half-baked nitwits who feature themselves "columnists"?

ME: This sort of thing is taking the lead among emailers. What I like about the macho cat defender position is that there's not a trace of environmentalism -- or desire to address my actual arguments -- anywhere to be found. It's all a Hobbesian argument in favor of killing birds because they're annoying (squirrels too). Why not simply poison the birds then? Why not design pesticides under the assumption that certain crop-eating bugs and birds are pests?

M'am:

The next time the David Hasselhoff video intrudes sit quietly with your eyes closed and repeat this mantra to yourself:

"Duke, Duke, Duke
Duke of Earl,
Duke, Duke,
Duke of Earl,
Duke, Duke,
Duke of Earl,
Duke, Duke"

(Washington, D.C.) Speaker of the House J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL), House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) and Government Reform Chairman Tom Davis (R-VA), released the following statement regarding the Committee on Government Reform's inquiry into the long-term care of incapacitated or non-ambulatory adults: "The Committee on Government Reform has initiated an inquiry into the long term care of incapacitated adults, an issue of growing importance to the federal government and federal healthcare policy. The committee's inquiry arises out of the case of Terri Schiavo, who is currently being kept alive in a hospice in Florida. Later this morning, we will issue a subpoena, which will require hospice administrators and attending physicians to preserve nutrition and hydration for Terri Schiavo to allow Congress to fully understand the procedures and practices that are currently keeping her alive. The subpoena will be joined by a Senate investigation as well.

"This inquiry should give hope to Terri, her parents and friends, and the millions of people throughout the world who are praying for her safety. This fight is not over."

Is it a matter of happenstance, is it without meaning, that America was taken by this drama at Eastertide, in the days before Palm Sunday, when a wanted man rode by donkey to an appointment at Golgotha?

Is it an accident that a great but troubled country that yearns so to be good is given such instruction at this time?

Maybe we should be thinking: God loves all of us, every one of us most tenderly, even convicts, maybe especially convicts, who know what they are and hang their heads and one of whom, so long ago, looked up, and cried out to the man on the other cross, and received from him a promise of forgiveness and a promise that soon, very soon, they would stand together in a place without pain.