If there is a law the administration does not want to comply with; first they ignore it. Then after their illegal activity is discovered, they make excuses to justify it and ridicule the law as passe. Finally, they try to "legitimize" it with signing statements and unconstitutional legislation. In light of this methodology, legislation is pointless * if the abuse of human rights continues.
The problem I see is that constitutionally, there is no firm check in place to compel congress to uphold the rule of law. Well, you may say we can vote then out. But I ask, What happens then or two years down the road? A lot of damage and abuse can occur in two years.
The problem as I see it is that "We the People" need to recognize that what has occurred is not just an aberration, but has been a deliberate attempt to exploit of a flaw in the current system and they exploited the flaw in order to usurp the Constitution in a quest for absolute power. What's needed is not a return to the "balance of power", but a full accounting and analysis. The only way to prevent further deliberate attempt from reoccurring is to repair the flaw and close up the hole.
While most of us will admit that something went wrong, without accountability and impeachment however, there isn't a consensus of what actually went wrong. Additionally, if there are no serious attempts to discover what went wrong, there never will be a consensus; let alone understanding of where things went wrong, what the true root cause of the problem might be, and how to go about fixing it once a root cause is determined. It is for this reason I think that all of this progressive legislation is pointless. It will either be ignored or repealed if real change is not institutionalized.
Perhaps the flaw in thinking was that our founding fathers assumed that the three branches of government would always jealously guard their constitutional powers, whereas the situation we have today is reverse. The GOP majority controlled congress did not jealously guard their powers, but instead willing abrogated and deferred their Constitutional authority to the executive and "We the People" found that we were powerless to compel our members of congress to assert Oaths of Office and their Constitutional authority.
Moreover, there is considerable resistance to the idea that there is something wrong and a flaw within our system of government and the Constitution. I don't want to get too involved with all the different reasons people might be resistant to the idea that there is a flaw being exploited by the neocons, but if perhaps that resistance is due to the feeling that we might betray the memory and work of our founding fathers, I would like to lay those fears to rest. I believe that Madison, Jefferson, and Hamilton Would Approve of amending or rewriting the Constitution to fix those flaws (i.e. perhaps an amendment making it illegal for Congressmen and women to not uphold their Oath of Office, meaning "We the People" can take our Congresscritter to court for not upholding their Oath of Office).
As if trying to rub our faces in it, this flaw has again led us back to the situation we find ourselves in today. We the People exercised our Constitutional power and voted in Congressmen and women we thought were going to uphold their Oaths of Office, but Congress has decided to only reclaim part of their Constitutional authority. Again, "We the People" find ourselves powerless to compel our members of congress to assert their authority. The bottom line is that by not exercising their power to impeach; Congress is, in effect, damning future generations to fascist rule and ensuring the destruction of democracy and the Constitution.
* A poorly framed diary that I previously posted. Perhaps in this context, the main point of this diary will be better understood.