Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senate Advances Patriot Act Renewal
AP ^ | 3/1/6 | LAURIE KELLMAN

Posted on 03/01/2006 10:15:31 AM PST by SmithL

WASHINGTON -- The Senate on Wednesday agreed to add to the Patriot Act new curbs on the government's power to pry into private records, moving President Bush's antiterror law a step closer to renewal before key provisions expire next week.

But even as it progressed on a 95-4 vote, some Democrats complained that the limits would be virtually meaningless in practice and sought to add even stronger privacy protections.

Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., refused to allow more tinkering, pointing out that renewal of the 2001 law is already months overdue.

The measure that passed Wednesday restricts somwhat the government's ability to access records in terrorism investigations by allowing court challenges to some demands.

That's not enough for Sens. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., and Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., who were invoking several procedural maneuvers to slow down the legislation's progress. They and two others, Sens. Jim Jeffords, I-Vt., and Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, voted 'no' on the bill. Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, did not vote.

"No one has the right to turn this body into a rubber stamp," said Feingold, the leading opponent of the law in Congress. "The White House played hardball and the decision was made by some to capitulate."

The procedural wrangling in the Senate prompted House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., to pull the measure off his chamber's schedule for the day. The House was not expected to vote on the matter until next week.

Still, the law appeared headed for passage and Bush's desk before 16 major provisions were set to expire on March 10. The Senate this week is expected to pass the second measure in the two-bill package. Both have to be approved by the House before the package is sent to the White House for Bush's signature.

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 109th; homelandsecurity; patriotact
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 03/01/2006 10:15:34 AM PST by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Hmm..

Seems like the Prez has capitol to me...As do those of us that leaned on our representatives in outrage last December for not getting this done.

It's really lovely how the drive by media spins one story and yet the agenda advances more than it doesn't. Disproving their wishes his Presidency was dead.

The MSM's template doesn't quite compute with what actually happens on the Hill.


2 posted on 03/01/2006 10:24:06 AM PST by Soul Seeker (Rush on the MSM: drive-by shooters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

Well said!


3 posted on 03/01/2006 11:45:32 AM PST by sarasota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

I couldn't agree more.


4 posted on 03/01/2006 11:51:06 AM PST by Minn. 4 Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

Only the dems would scream about the Patriot Act and the NSA program as being TOO intrusive...

But, then bash the Dubai deal for not being intrusive enough..pffffft


5 posted on 03/01/2006 12:04:39 PM PST by Txsleuth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

So he still needs all these powers for security because it's endless, dangerous "war" but the UAE Dubai Ports deal is safe and okay?


6 posted on 03/01/2006 12:06:25 PM PST by In_25_words_or_less (It's more a guideline than a rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

Well said! The MSM template doesn't agree with ANY facts, on the hill or otherwise.


7 posted on 03/01/2006 12:14:21 PM PST by ohioWfan (PROUD Mom of an Iraq War VET! THANKS, son!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: In_25_words_or_less
When the U.S. military OK's it, it's a pretty safe bet that it IS 'safe and okay.'

It all depends on whether you trust the people who DO security, or the people who get paid to talk and show up on TV.

I'll trust the people who know what's going on.

8 posted on 03/01/2006 12:16:16 PM PST by ohioWfan (PROUD Mom of an Iraq War VET! THANKS, son!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
I'll trust the people who know what's going on.

I'm pretty sure history shows that's not always a prudent course. Especially when people start shushing their own perceptions and common sense to do it.

9 posted on 03/01/2006 12:32:16 PM PST by In_25_words_or_less (It's more a guideline than a rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

"But even as it progressed on a 95-4 vote, some Democrats complained that the limits would be virtually meaningless in practice and sought to add even stronger privacy protections."

Amazing how they talk a different game and don't want a no vote on this serious legislation.


10 posted on 03/01/2006 12:56:39 PM PST by Grampa Dave (Visit Free Republic to enjoy shameless Schadenfreude as the lies of liberals are exposed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

Excellent summary. Your summary is made even more valide with the massive vote approval of 95-4.

"As do those of us that leaned on our representatives in outrage last December for not getting this done.

It's really lovely how the drive by media spins one story and yet the agenda advances more than it doesn't. Disproving their wishes his Presidency was dead.

The MSM's template doesn't quite compute with what actually happens on the Hill."


11 posted on 03/01/2006 12:58:23 PM PST by Grampa Dave (Visit Free Republic to enjoy shameless Schadenfreude as the lies of liberals are exposed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

The polls are wrong, and even fraudulent in some cases. Republicans are happy with President Bush, but not with their "leaders" in Congress. If Bush were running right now for re-election (hypothetical), he would beat any Republican contender or any DemoRat nominated.


12 posted on 03/01/2006 12:58:51 PM PST by pleikumud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

95-4 is a rubber stamp???


13 posted on 03/01/2006 1:00:24 PM PST by newzjunkey (All I need is a safe home and peace of mind. Why am I in CA?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: In_25_words_or_less
I'm pretty sure that trusting the Coast Guard to decide what is a security risk and what is not, when THEY are the ones in charge of that security, is quite prudent.

But then I'm biased in favor of our military, and perhaps you are not.

14 posted on 03/01/2006 1:22:02 PM PST by ohioWfan (PROUD Mom of an Iraq War VET! THANKS, son!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
"But even as it progressed on a 95-4 vote, some Democrats complained that the limits would be virtually meaningless in practice and sought to add even stronger privacy protections."

Amazing how they talk a different game and don't want a no vote on this serious legislation.

You have to remember the Presstitute Math (is that the basis for "New Math" or is it the other way around?). 4 'Rats constitute a noteworthy amount, and 41 out of 100 equals a majority in their eyes.

15 posted on 03/01/2006 2:19:13 PM PST by steveegg (Sen. Ted "Swimmer" Kennedy's vehicles have killed more people than V.P. Dick Cheney's guns)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: steveegg

If interfering with my privacy could catch a terrorist, please interfere with my privacy.


16 posted on 03/01/2006 3:58:10 PM PST by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan

I'll trust our military in a heartbeat over a power-lusting senator or communist-loving democrat. This uproar really does slap at the Coast Guard ....not that that ever concerns the left.


17 posted on 03/01/2006 4:22:52 PM PST by prairiebreeze (Casey Sheehan, thank you for your service. I'm proud of you. Even if your own mother isn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

So, it's "President Bush's" anti-terror law. Uh-huh. Funny, I didn't seem him passing it the first time or this time either one.


18 posted on 03/01/2006 4:23:53 PM PST by prairiebreeze (Casey Sheehan, thank you for your service. I'm proud of you. Even if your own mother isn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

I was in the gallery to see the vote today.

Wow, was I struck by how fragile Byrd looks. The man can hardly move. Althoug he did muster the strength to stand and give the thumbs down when he voted. His aide practically had to keep him from tipping over.


19 posted on 03/01/2006 9:24:03 PM PST by mn-bush-man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
"No one has the right to turn this body into a rubber stamp,"
...progressed on a 95-4 vote

That's right, but 4 can hold up the US CONgress and national security. What a putz feingold is.

20 posted on 03/01/2006 10:29:58 PM PST by Just A Nobody (NEVER AGAIN - Support our troops. I *LOVE* my attitude problem! Beware the Enemedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson