For six months:
The terror-fighting USA Patriot Act may have a new lease on life.
The GOP-controlled Senate on Wednesday approved a six-month extension of the USA Patriot Act to keep the anti-terror law from expiring on Dec. 31. President Bush gave it his grudging blessing.
The Republican-controlled House is now expected to come back and consider the legislation keeping the 16 provisions of the law passed after the terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington from expiring.
Republican leaders and Bush wanted to make most of the law permanent, but were stymied by a filibuster in the Senate and had to resort to a six-month extension.
“This will allow more time to finally agree on a bill that protects our rights and freedoms while preserving important tools for fighting terrorism,” said Sen. Feingold, D-Wis., who was the only senator to vote against the original Patriot Act in 2001.
More as it becomes available.
The Disenfranchised Voter
I’m pleased with the outcome. At least there will be debate over it now.
Bush said he’d veto a temporary extension. Who wants to bet he won’t veto it?
Ancient Purple
Don’t forget that the House has to agree as well, and there is no guarantee of that.
The Other Steve
Bush is too much of a coward to veto anything.
They ought to go through one by one, and make permanent the less controversial ones involving money laundering, and then adding additional safeguards to the problematic ones.
Debate isn’t a bad thing guys…
Lines
I thought all fillibusters were evil, horrible things that should be removed from all proceedings? You mean the Demoncrats are using it for something that most American’s would approve of? Twice in two or three days its been used, and always it appears America has come out ahead afterwards.
At least I’m kinda proud of the Democrats, for a little while. Lets see if the fight stays in them for more than a day or two.
Cromagnon
Why do we need the Patriot Act?? King George can just do whatever he wants to anyway
Gratefulcub
Call me naïve and uninformed, but I have a question.
Why are the bills that are passed by congress bundled together? It seems idiotic. Just as an example, why was ANWR put on the defense bill? I know why it was, but why CAN it be?
The Patriot Act is 16 separate pieces of legislation, at least. Why doesn’t all 16 have to be debated and approved as one. I believe about 13 of them would pass 99-1 or so in the senate. Then, debate and alter the other 3 until they can be agreed upon.
demimondian
Why can legislation be bundled? Two reasons: first, unbundling provisions don’t work, and, second, the bundling of unrelated items into a single bill provides a mechanism through which negotiation can take place — you and I disagree about two items, and don’t entirely trust one another when we agree “All right, I’ll vote for yours if you vote for mine.” So, we put them in a single bill, and then we’re forced to vote the same way on both of them.
That’s not a bad thing, it’s a good thing.
OCSteve
At first I was pissed – what the hell good is a majority when you can’t get everyone in line and get your party’s stuff through.
Now though, I think it may be brilliant. It puts the Dems and RINOs in the position of voting against it or obstructing a vote just a few months before the mid-term elections. The campaign commercials will write themselves.
Sojourner
Did it ever occur to you that your party is under the control of people who are outside the mainstream? Check the polls – you might learn something.
demimondian
They will indeed. “Bill Frist wants to spy on you!” (Morphing Frist into Cheney.) “They don’t want you to have a choice!”
Demagoguery cuts both ways, OCSteve.
Ancient Purple
Sounds more like you want a true parliamentary system like in the U.K. where you have to get special permission from your party leader to “vote your conscience.”
Gratefulcub
2006 Slogans write themselves? Why don’t the Dems just throw caution to the wind and stand for what they believe in, and what is right? (that was rhetorical, I know why they don’t: 80% of them are useless pols)
“We also care about fighting terrorism and keeping America safe. But, we are the party that promises to protect your civil liberties.”
And of course, the one that writes itself:
“We are the party that hasn’t plead guilty to accepting bribes.”
Bill Arnett
“This will allow more time to finally agree on a bill that protects our rights and freedoms while preserving important tools for fighting terrorism,” said Sen. Feingold, D-Wis.…”
Unfortunately it also gives Bushco, the House of Unrepentant, and the See-not time to contrive another “emergency” or other sudden “new development” in the fictional war on terror which will make it seem IMPERATIVE that it be permanently renewed (and it will be tied to “must pass” legislation).
This is why we democrats can’t win elections. We let the Rethugs strong-arm us, out fox us, let them define us, allow them the high moral ground, can’t express solidarity on ANY issue, and we wonder why we don’t get elected.
I think we need a “Progressive Democratic Party,” and, those without balls need not apply. We have to recapture our party before we can recapture our country.
demimondian
Interestingly, the House only extended the Act for a month in the end. How odd. I wonder why they wanted a faster turn around?
Jimmy Jazz
Six days ago:
Today:
Which guy was the flip-flopper again?
The Other Steve
Honestly, I think after the 72nd fabricated “Emergency”, the public starts to question if maybe these guys aren’t trying to scare them.
I mean after all the fabricated emergencies during the 2004 cycle, I think people have finally caught on.
I don’t think it’s going to help to win elections by excluding women.
The Other Steve
And behold the Republican mindset.
It’s not about standing up for what’s right. It’s about doing shit to get elected, even if in the end it destroys the country.
Darrell
Harry Reid bragging about “blocking” the Patriot act is a classic example of that
The Disenfranchised Voter
Feingold is my hero as of late. If he runs for President and gets the Dem nomination, there is little doubt in my mind that I would vote for him.
The guy is his own man.
kchiker
What about you, John? I know you hate campaign finance reform but unlike McCain, this guy walks the walk.
He’s the Anti-Bush.