The Senate finally does the obvious - it tries to make the mistreatment of prisoners outside the law

Yesterday, the Senate voted overwhelmingly in support of an amendment to a military appropriations bill to regulate how the military can treat its prisoners. Led in part by Republican Senator John McCain, a prisoner of war in Vietnam for over 5 years who was repeatedly mistreated/tortured, the amendment's goal is two-fold: 1) To ban "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;" and 2) to make US armed forces comply with interrogation techniques as outlined in the latest version of the Army Field Manual.

McCain stated:

"Mr. President, let me just close by noting that I hold no brief for the prisoners. I do hold a brief for the reputation of the United States of America. We are Americans, and we hold ourselves to humane standards of treatment of people no matter how evil or terrible they may be. To do otherwise undermines our security, but it also undermines our greatness as a nation. We are not simply any other country. We stand for something more in the world – a moral mission, one of freedom and democracy and human rights at home and abroad. We are better than these terrorists, and we will we win. The enemy we fight has no respect for human life or human rights. They don’t deserve our sympathy. But this isn’t about who they are. This is about who we are. These are the values that distinguish us from our enemies"

It's tough to argue against the Senator's logic. While it is sometimes inconvenient in situations such as military and police actions, disregarding the rights of others puts us on a slippery slope that has and will continue to lead some to go too far. At least with this amendment in place and part of our laws, Americans can truly point to situations of abuse and say that the perpetrators are not following sanctioned conduct.

By the way, the vote on this amendment was 90-9 (with one Senator not voting). Care to see who wanted to keep mistreatment/torture as a legal tool in our interrogation arsenal? See the voting results here.

So what is the White House response? In the October 5th press briefing, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan made these statements:

"Well, there are already laws on the books, and so I think part of this, if you go back and look at the statement of administration policy that we put out, it would be unnecessary and duplicative. And it would limit the President's ability as Commander-in-Chief to effectively carry out the war on terrorism."

"Well, we put out the statement of administration policy, which stated our concerns about that and stated -- let me specifically refer you to it -- our views when it came to if those amendments were part of the final legislation. It said, if it's presented, then there would be a recommendation of a veto, I believe."

So in order to keep the legal capability to mistreat prisoners, the White House is willing to veto the bill, despite the fact that McCain notes the amendment has the support of "28 former high-ranking military officers, including General Joseph Hoar, who commanded Centcom; General John Shalikashvili, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs; RADM John Hutson and RADM Don Guter, who each served as the Navy’s top JAG; and LTGEN Claudia Kennedy, who served as Deputy Chief of Staff for Army Intelligence."

Certainly tough times call for tough measures, but when tough, experienced men like McCain say we need to not only condemn, but also make illegal prisoner mistreatment, it's about time we did. Better late than never.

Let's hope this bill and its amendment make it out of Congress, forcing the White House to explain just why they need to keep mistreatment a viable option for our citizen soldiers.