Of all the threats facing our nation today, you probably weren’t aware of this one: submarines. No, we’re not talking Soviet nuclear subs or German U-boats. These are privately owned and used for transporting drugs.

Not to worry, though, your Congress is on the case, with no less than four – count ‘em four! – bills to get at the submarine scourge.

For example, H.R. 6295 would prohibit “operation by any means or embarking in any submersible or semi-submersible vessel that is without nationality and that is navigating or has navigated into, through or from waters beyond the outer limit of the territorial sea of a single country or a lateral limit of that country’s territorial sea with an adjacent country.”

Thanks goodness! I feel safer already.

S. 3198 does something similar, specifically citing the threat of drug trafficking using submarines.

S. 3351, the Drug Trafficking Interdiction Assistance Act of 2008: same thing using more words – and (more words? yep!) it was introduced by vice presidential candidate Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE).

Rounding out the field is S. 3526, which creates a federal felony for operating or embarking on an international voyage in a submersible or semi-submersible vessel without nationality.

Where do we place the blame for the submarine scourge? Perhaps narco-traffickers, who prey on our children and deserve all the firepower we can lay down in their direction. Perhaps it’s the counter-productive drug war, which we can only win by abandoning. For my part, I blame the Beatles, who came up with the idea of a drug-laden submarine in the first place.

I had to do a double-take when I first saw this bill.

H.R. 6615 would “provide for the transport of the enemy combatants detained in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to Washington, D.C., where the United States Supreme Court will be able to more effectively micromanage the detainees by holding them on the Supreme Court grounds . . . .”

OK, I get it.

Some member of Congress doesn’t like the Supreme Court’s rulings on treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay and decided to introduce a bill to makes a symbolic point: “Well if the dang Supreme Court wants these guys treated well, they should have to serve ‘em sandwiches and sweet tea right there in their own offices!”

I like sarcasm and irony and all, but on balance I think this annoys me. For a symbolic gesture, this guy put his staff to work, he put the House parliamentarian to work, he put the Government Printing Office to work, and the committees of jurisdiction too (Armed Services and Judiciary).

This is taking the legislative process very unseriously. It wastes a lot of people’s time and money.

So, Louie Gohmert, leave it out next time. There are people who differ with the Supreme Court’s rulings, and they offer serious legislation and serious arguments. They’re doing they’re jobs as they see them, not monkeying around with taxpayers’ money on stunts that they think will make cheap political points.

Reserving my right to applaud abuses of the legislative process that are actually clever, here’s the current vote on the bill. Click to vote, comment, learn more, or edit the wiki article on the bill.