Posted on 12/16/2005 2:34:00 PM PST by anonymoussierra
WASHINGTON - The Senate on Friday refused to reauthorize major portions of the USA Patriot Act after critics complained they infringed too much on Americans' privacy and liberty, dealing a huge defeat to the Bush administration and Republican leaders.
In a crucial vote early Friday, the bill's Senate supporters were not able to get the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster by Sens. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and Larry Craig, R-Idaho, and their allies. The final vote was 52-47.
{end of}
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Republicans congressional leaders had lobbied fiercely to make most of the expiring Patriot Act provisions permanent.
They also supported new safeguards and expiration dates to the act's two most controversial parts: authorization for roving wiretaps, which allow investigators to monitor multiple devices to keep a target from evading detection by switching phones or computers; and secret warrants for books, records and other items from businesses, hospitals and organizations such as libraries.
Feingold, Craig and other critics said those efforts weren't enough, and have called for the law to be extended in its present form so they can continue to try and add more civil liberties safeguards. But Bush, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and House Speaker Dennis Hastert have said they won't accept a short-term extension of the law.
If a compromise is not reached, the 16 Patriot Act provisions expire on Dec. 31, but the expirations have enormous exceptions. Investigators will still be able to use those powers to complete any investigation that began before the expiration date and to initiate new investigations of any alleged crime that began before Dec. 31, according to a provision in the original law. There are ongoing investigations of every known terrorist group, including al-Qaida, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Islamic Jihad and the Zarqawi group in Iraq, and all the Patriot Act tools could continue to be used in those investigations.
Five Republicans voted against the reauthorization: Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, John Sununu of New Hampshire, Craig and Frist. Two Democrats voted to extend the provisions: Sens. Tim Johnson of South Dakota and Ben Nelson of Nebraska.
Frist, R-Tenn., changed his vote at the last moment after seeing the critics would win. He decided to vote with the prevailing side so he could call for a new vote at any time. He immediately objected to an offer of a short term extension from Democrats, saying the House won't approve it and the president won't sign it.
"We have more to fear from terrorism than we do from this Patriot Act," Frist warned.
{end of}
If the Patriot Act provisions expire, Republicans say they will place the blame on Democrats in next year's midterm elections. "In the war on terror, we cannot afford to be without these vital tools for a single moment," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. "The time for Democrats to stop standing in the way has come."
But the Patriot Act's critics got a boost from a New York Times report saying Bush authorized the National Security Agency to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds — perhaps thousands — of people inside the United States. Previously, the NSA typically limited its domestic surveillance to foreign embassies and missions and obtained court orders for such investigations.
"I don't want to hear again from the attorney general or anyone on this floor that this government has shown it can be trusted to use the power we give it with restraint and care," said Feingold, the only senator to vote against the Patriot Act in 2001.
"It is time to have some checks and balances in this country," shouted Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record), ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. "We are more American for doing that."
Most of the Patriot Act — which expanded the government's surveillance and prosecutorial powers against suspected terrorists, their associates and financiers — was made permanent when Congress overwhelmingly passed it after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington. Making the rest of it permanent was a priority for both the Bush administration and Republican leaders on Capitol Hill before Congress adjourns for the year.
The House on Wednesday passed a House-Senate compromise bill to renew the expiring portions of the Patriot Act that supporters say added significant safeguards to the law. Its Senate supporters say that compromise is the only thing that has a chance to pass Congress before 2006.
{end of}
"This is a defining moment. There are no more compromises to be made, no more extensions of time. The bill is what it is," said Sen. Jon Kyl (news, bio, voting record), R-Ariz.
The bill's opponents say the original act was rushed into law, and Congress should take more time now to make sure the rights of innocent Americans are safeguarded before making the expiring provisions permanent.
"Those that would give up essential liberties in pursuit in a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security," said Sen. John Sununu (news, bio, voting record), R-N.H. They suggested a short extension so negotiations could continue, but the Senate scrapped a Democratic-led effort to renew the USA Patriot Act for just three months before the vote began.
"Today, fair-minded senators stood firm in their commitment to the Constitution and rejected the White House's call to pass a faulty law," said Caroline Fredrickson, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Washington legislative office. "This was a victory for the privacy and liberty of all Americans."
When you read articles like this, insert "President Hillary" in place of "President Bush" -- and then maybe you'll understand why some of us don't want to increase the snooping authority of federal agents.
"It's going to take another, possibly even
two more, 9/11 events before the idiots in
Congress see the writing on the wall. They
still want to "negotiate with the enemy" and
use "diplomatic measures" to solve the terrorist
problem. [I paraphrase]"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I loathe what the Senate has become.
ping
Ha, and you think marxist Hillary Clinton would be someone who would reduce "power in federal hands"?
She's already and many times over been firm in her resolute intentions to "take away" from citizens whatever she deems necessary, as do her fellow marxist democrats, for what they define as "the common good" -- that means, "them."
Fearing the security measures provided by the Patriot Act for abusing "power" and such misses the point. What we need to fear is terrorism and it looks like conclusively now, Democrats. And that includes the ACLU.
Thank you
How much freedom are you willing to surrender to the federal government in order to feel safe?
"In the war on terror, we cannot afford to be without these vital tools for a single moment," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. "The time for Democrats to stop standing in the way has come."
"In the war on terror, we cannot afford to be without these vital tools for a single moment," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. "The time for Democrats to stop standing in the way has come."
Why not just have certain parts of it sunset as soon as Bush's term is up?
Frist's no vote was procedural. It was done so that the issue could be brought up again later. Anybody who has been paying attention to the Senate over the last few years would know this.
So as of today, I believe the Gorelick Wall is back in existence. This is a very bad thing.
Thank you
the Patriot Act's critics got a boost from a New York Times report saying Bush authorized the National Security Agency to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds — perhaps thousands — of people inside the United States.""""
With APPROVAL of the 2002 Dem. controlled Senate and the Judge!!!!!!
I am glad the "Patriot Act" provisions will not be permanent. Too much unchecked power in the hands of this President would soon enough become waaay too much unchecked power in the hands of the next President -- whoever that may be. I like President Bush, but if he would simply pay attention to the border, he wouldn't need dictatorial police powers.
Ironically, isn't that the effect of what the Dems (and Republican Craig) are pushing? To make sure these enhanced powers won't be permanent? That's ok with me. I'd definitely want a new vote on these powers if and when Hillary gets into office. Unlike a lot of freepers, I realize that the reason you can't trust government with massive power is that government won't always be run by Republicans or conservatives.
Oxycontin withdrawl is a bitch.
Rules of debate in the Senate require a vote to close debate on any bill, this is called "cloture" and requires sixty votes, not a simple majority. Until Cloture is passed, the bill is still open for debate, endless yammering by senators known as a filibuster.
thank you so much...you just also answered the other questions I've had. "Cloture" and "filibuster" are terms used so very often and so often unexplained. Thanks, again.
Let me ask you .Just what freedoms have you been denied since 9/11 ? I love all this eroding away of freedon talk . I don't know ONE person who has personally had their freedom and privacy violated since 9/11.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.