…as we all said it would. Majority Leader McConnell wants to amend the USA PATRIOT Act (possibly the most ridiculous legislative acronym ever) to make it worse.
There is a portion of the Act, Section 215, which authorizes the FBI to seize “any tangible thing” relating to the subject of an investigation, without a warrant. Mitch’s legislation would expand the definition of tangible things to include web browsing history. I don’t think I need to drone on about how this is very bad.
Senator Wyden (D-OR), consistently one of the best on this issue, filed an amendment that would have excluded browser history. It failed 59-37. Notably absent from the vote were Senators Sanders and Murray. Feinstein, Manchin, the rest of the usual suspects, and also Kaine for some reason voted no.
Well there’s one quite glaring absence who certainly would have put this over the top pic.twitter.com/3TYVWhtfMC
— Jim Newell (@jim_newell) May 13, 2020
Sanders and Murray better have damn good excuses, because this is not a power that any Attorney General–to say nothing of Barr–should have. Section 215 is a travesty; expanding it is unconscionable. Shame on everybody in the Democratic caucus who opposed this amendment, or didn’t bother to show up and vote.
Luther Siler
Is a 3/5 majority typically required for amendments or is there some sort of shenanigans going on here?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Kaine and Whitehouse were the big surprises to me. Shaheen and Hassan, too. Carper doesn’t get much attention, but this strikes me as pretty typical of him. I gather Murray was literally on a plane back to DC, and I saw some suggestion on twitter that McConnell rushed the vote precisely because he hoped to jam the Dems with those absences, but I didn’t see that theory taken up anywhere. I am willing to listen to Sanders’ excuse, because I am open-minded and shit
I try to give Feinstein the benefit of the doubt because she’s been a stand-up at other points, but…
@Luther Siler: this was a cloture vote, as I understand, 60 vote threshold.
Baud
Probably the rules set for this bill.
Baud
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: The screenshot says “Amendment Rejected.” If that’s the official Senate designation, it wouldn’t have been a cloture vote.
Baud
Sinema was a nice surprise. Real weird line up on this one.
Frankensteinbeck
Dude. Sanders had better have a DAMNED good explanation. Everything he claims to believe in and egotistical showboating for his fans both should have him sprinting to be the deciding vote here. What the Hell.
Major Major Major Major
@Baud: The senate sometimes sets a 60-vote threshold for legislative amendments. It can be done on a bill-by-bill basis within the motion to begin debate or whatever it’s called.
West of the Cascades
I assume this (the portion of amendment McConnell is proposing that would include browser history) has no chance of passing in the House — right??
Cameron
So now your home isn’t your castle; it’s your jail. I wonder why any Democrat would vote ‘nay.’ I wonder why a self-styled democratic socialist didn’t bother to vote at all. The answers to both those questions will probably be really depressing.
cain
Yeah, I wish we could tell these senators that you’re giving Trump’s man power and that power can be used against them. They still think it’s the same old business as before. It’s very frustrating.
Major Major Major Major
@West of the Cascades: I’m not holding out hope for the House to block this.
@cain: The same old business as before is also terrible!
MattF
Well… my browser history shows a lot of ‘Balloon Juice’. Sigh. GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY, as they say.
negative 1
You’re focusing on the abstentions and not that the normally very, very good Sheldon Whitehouse and the party’s Vice Freaking Presidential nominee last time voted no?
Omnes Omnibus
I remember being told that only white dudes worry about things like Internet privacy and besides we already gave all our shit to Google so why should it matter.
Baud
@negative 1:
In the abstract, a “no” vote is worse, but on the other hand, Tim Kaine and his acolytes haven’t spent the better part of four years telling us how much better he is than the rest of us.
Major Major Major Major
@negative 1:
To quote the post that I wrote right here which you are commenting on,
Also, ‘not present’ is not an abstention, but instead indicates ‘not’ being ‘present’.
Lum’s Better Half
Only leftists have agency.
Cameron
@cain: If they genuinely don’t understand what’s going on, they have no business being in the Senate.
Major Major Major Major
Pray tell, what inspired this comment?
Baud
Oh, Lordy. This is the name of the bill: USA FREEDOM Reauthorization Act of 2020.
I would vote against it on that ground alone.
Lum’s Better Half
Negative1’s comment. And the downplaying of the D no votes. Plus they should feel “shame“ but you can’t spare any real vitriol for them.
tam1MI
From what I have heard, Senator Murray was on her way to Washington DC and could not get there in time for the boat. Sanders people, on the other hand, have been stiff-arming anybody who asked for an explanation of why he abstained.
Major Major Major Major
@Lum’s Better Half: If that’s your interpretation of this post, and words like ‘travesty’, ‘unconscionable’, and ‘shame’, then I can’t really help you.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Lum’s Better Half: yeah, all those people who said Maggie Hassan was gonna single-handedly transform American politics and government have some ‘splainin’ to do
Baud
@Major Major Major Major:
Normally, I would agree, but this appears to be a FISA specific bill as opposed to a rider on must-pass legislation. Given how lopsided the Senate vote was, I’m not sure.
Major Major Major Major
@Baud: This is the routine patriot act extension we hear about every few years. It doesn’t apply to the whole law, but it’s always been seen as “must-pass”.
Lum’s Better Half
So the 4 absents vote and it’s 61-39. Does this post get written?
Hate Sanders if you want, but own it.
Baud
@Major Major Major Major: Oh, it’ll pass. But they still have to negotiate over the terms. I just don’t where this issue lands on the House’s priority list.
Major Major Major Major
I don’t understand this question at all. Not one bit. It makes grammatical sense but that’s about it. Of course I wouldn’t write a post about the amendment’s failure if the amendment passed. Or did you mean something that’s not plainly apparent? Perhaps there’s a typo?
Lum’s Better Half
@Major Major Major Major: The point of this post is to punch Sanders. Which is fine if that’s what you want to do.
If if wasn’t for that opportunity, this bill would not warranted attention.
ie switch Sanders with a D who voted for the amendment: does anyone care then?
cain
@Major Major Major Major:
True dat. No need to keep sinking into quicksand though!
japa21
@Major Major Major Major: S/he apparently sees the whole post as being a knock on Sanders. Nobody else. The reading skills of a small portion of Sanders’ supporters is quite limited.
Omnes Omnibus
@Major Major Major Major: I think you gored his ox.
Major Major Major Major
@Lum’s Better Half:
I see you’re new here. If you follow the category you will find that online privacy is my beat.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Lum’s Better Half: I think I see (part of) the problem: You think Bernie Sanders’ full name is “Bernard Sanders and Murray. Feinstein, Manchin, the rest of the usual suspects, and also Kaine”.
Also, you’re a cultist.
Mnemosyne
Sigh. Of course DiFi was on the wrong side. Sadly, Kevin DeLeon was the wrong challenger at the wrong time. In retrospect, they should have run a younger, more energetic woman against her.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Mnemosyne: with the increasingly hinky Burr thing going on– I don’t think the FBI would’ve shown up at his door if he were more like Devin Nunes or Lindsey Graham– I return to my fantasy where DiFi says, “You know, I’m older than richer than Monty Burns. Here’s everything I know that I’m not supposed to tell you. Tell Big Willie Barr if he wants to come for me, here’s a list of my fifteen expensive lawyers, not counting the ones who will sign on for free.”
Mnemosyne
@Lum’s Better Half:
When a Senator sets himself up as Better And More Pure than his colleagues, he needs to expect a few punches when it turns out that he’s just as flawed as the rest of us humans.
Sorry that your Personal Jesus isn’t getting enough worship despite being a two-time loser as a presidential nominee.
Mnemosyne
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Unfortunately, DiFi really believes that more government surveillance is the right thing to do and she refuses to be budged. It’s a huge flaw of hers that has been exploited by the Republicans over and over again. She’s good on other stuff (like gun control and women’s rights) but absolutely terrible on surveillance.
Major Major Major Major
@Mnemosyne: I don’t think it’s been “exploited by republicans.” This is what Feinstein wants, full stop.
Mnemosyne
@Major Major Major Major:
Do we really want to get into deep motives here? I think DiFi wants government surveillance for different reasons than the Republicans do, but their reasons dovetail so she votes with them. YMMV.
Major Major Major Major
@Mnemosyne: they want the exact same laws so I don’t see how they’re exploiting her is all.
Mnemosyne
@Major Major Major Major:
I think DiFi’s intention is to prevent domestic terrorism, and she genuinely thinks that these laws are the best way to prevent that. Of course, the road to hell is paved with good intentions and she’s actually doing harm rather than solving the problem she wants to solve.
I think that the Republicans are far more interested in suppressing dissent against Republicans using domestic surveillance. Again, YMMV. Maybe DiFi thinks that investigating civil rights activists and trying to disrupt their protests is A-OK and I’m just being naive, but I don’t think so based on the available evidence.
Calouste
As I said on an earlier thread, I don’t think McConnell would have allowed more than 59 yeahs. The Republicans that voted for it are just for show, and would have turned to “no” if there was a risk this would pass.
Major Major Major Major
@Mnemosyne: ok, but they obviously want the exact same laws. She has had ample opportunities to change section 215. Many democrats want these laws but Feinstein stands out for her career-spanning love of effortless government surveillance and opposition to encryption.
Major Major Major Major
@Calouste: I’m not gonna live in counterfactual land where Democrats are insulated from bad votes because McConnell is apparently a wizard (who couldn’t count to 50 to repeal Obamacare but I guess his high-profile failures don’t count)
He wouldn’t have had to pull a stunt like this and wait until key votes were indisposed if he was that confident.
Recall
@Mnemosyne: I love how he lives in your head rent free.
Mnemosyne
@Major Major Major Major:
Eh, I just think it’s easier to persuade people whose underlying motives are good than it is to persuade people who just want to spy on their political enemies and prevent dissent. Again, YMMV.
Mnemosyne
@Recall:
You wouldn’t like the room I built for him. It’s not a very nice one. ?
ETA: Though, to be fair, Sanders has been doing and saying all the right things in public right now. It’s very clear that the last thing he wants is for Trump to have four more years to establish an autocracy. Too bad there’s a cadre of Sanders supporters who are more interested in Being Right than they are in repairing Trump’s damage.
Major Major Major Major
@Mnemosyne: during the last crisis, Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders teamed up to pass an amendment to “audit the Fed.” Sanders wanted to know what they’d been up to (probably to complain about how it was “unfair to Main Street” or whatever) and Paul wanted to go back to the gold standard. The legislative language was obviously the same since it was a single amendment. They were both wrong. I don’t see what’s complicated.
Just Chuck
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I’m not. I’m done with this fucking fraud.
Just Chuck
@Mnemosyne: He’s certainly interested in talking about the Trump autocracy, but actually doing anything about it with a vote is too “establishment” for him.
Recall
@Mnemosyne: It’s almost as if they believe that the damage began long before Trump.
Mike J
Seems pretty analogous to a pen recorder. Which shouldn’t be available without a warrant, but…
tam1MI
@Recall: All the more reason to get the repairs done, then.
Major Major Major Major
@Mike J: How so?
Enhanced Voting Techniques
I think people are missing the real thing “the Republicans, while denouncing Deep State and calling for less government, expanded the government ability to intrude into our lives”
Mnemosyne
@Recall:
And yet they don’t want to do anything to stop Trump. Nach Trump, uns is going to work about as well as it did in 1933, but you guys are going to go down that dead end no matter what I say.
John Revolta
Well I have to go along with Calouste. McConnell, gotdamn his eyes, knows his business. There’s plenty R names among that 59 that would’ve switched if he told them to.
Recall
@Mnemosyne: Oh please explain this historical analogy yours.
Bobby Thomson
The argument would be that it’s a poison pill that will kill the entire bill – but it won’t.
Bobby Thomson
@Lum’s Better Half:
What’s your fucking point? That a post about an amendment failing doesn’t get written if the amendment doesn’t fail? You’re a god damn genius!
Is that supposed to be pejorative? Like at all? The thing about representative democracy is that when people shit the bed they get called out on it. Even St. Bernard the Unproductive.
Recall
@Bobby Thomson: I’m pretty sure he’s making fun of your tragic lack of self awareness.
joel hanes
The entire PATRIOT Act is a travesty, and should be repealed.
Matt McIrvin
Kaine and the New Hampshirites disappoint me. My Senators did the right thing.
BruceJ
“New incognito window, who dis?”
J R in WV
@Lum’s Better Half:
No, Lum, the point of this post is that personal privacy in America is more American than the PATRIOT act is. Join the other trolls in the pie safe, you dammed fool!!!
Also, punching Sanders is a pro-democracy act, he’s a Russian stooge just like you~!!~
Uncle Cosmo
@Recall: Mnem ain’t about to waste blameless electrons on a fucking imbecile like you. And neither will I. FOADIAF.
laura
I’ve hated the PATRIOT ACT since only in the fever of 9/11 enactment. It was my 3rd year in law school and I was so disappointed when asking one of the school’s Con Law professors about the obvious overreach he tut tut little lady’d me that this could surely only be a temporary measure and so not unreasonable. Yeah, not so much.
Regarding Senator Feinstein, I almost voted for her challenger, but ultimately felt it was a risk I couldnt take. I will never get over my disgust at her husband’s role on both the buyer and seller side in selling off our nation’s Post Offices (Charlie Pierce is good on this theft) and how trump ultimately got his hands on one. That said, I believe that her stance on the security state is informed by both the assassination of Congressman Leo Ryan and serious wounding of then congressional aide Jackie Speier on the runway in Guyana as the People’s Temple spiraled into a mass murder suicide in Jonestown. That was followed by the executions of Mayor George Moscone and supervisor Harvey Milk. I dont have any way to back this up other than having been a constituent and having grown up in the San Francisco Bay Area when these events transpired, but I believe that she feels that there is a very important role for intelligence that could possibly prevent serious crimes or attacks on public safety. Just this gal’s .02 cents.
Heywood J.
Once again, good ol’ DiFi affirms my decision to never, ever have voted for her. The hell with her and the rest of the so-called Democratic supporters of Bill Barr’s Fascist Security State Funhouse. Looking forward to their shock and surprise when he abuses the powers they give him.
Matt
Amazing how the faux-Dem fascist-enablers who voted *no* somehow don’t need an excuse when there’s hippie-punching to be had.
Major Major Major Major
@Matt: such reading comprehension problems in this thread. It’s amazing. Did you pass high school english?