Tuesday night the Republican-controlled House of Representatives failed to pass extensions to three provisions of the Patriot Act. The measures required a two-thirds majority vote and 26 Republicans voted with 122 Democrats, defeating the bill, 277to 148. While 67 Democrats voted with most Republicans, they came up seven votes short. Ten House members did not vote. The rejection of renewing these provisions of the Patriot Act may be the first indication of the more independent Tea Party-backed candidates revolting against the GOP establishment. The bill would have extended surveillance powers against terrorism until December, 2013. Many claim the USA patriot Act violates civil liberties. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), who opposed the extension, was happy to get support from some of the freshman Republicans.
The provisions set to expire February 28 cover three unpopular aspects of the Patriot Act. One dealt with allowing the FBI to use ‘roving wiretaps’. A second provision gives government investigators to access ‘tangible items’ like library records and the third allows suspects to be investigated even if they are not connected to any known terrorist group.
The Obama administration supported the extension of these provisions. Nancy Pelosi used the term ‘disarray’ to describe how the GOP mismanaged the vote. I suppose in her mind they should have snuck it inside some 2,000-plus-page bill that nobody would read before voting? But many others on the Far-Left are happily surprised by the Tea Party taking a stand for personal privacy. Apparently they did not consider that the Tea Party Caucus actually read the Constitution and is familiar with the 4th and 5th amendments.
However you want to slice it, yesterday’s failure of the House to extend some of the USA Patriot Act provisions shows that the Tea Party is independent from the GOP establishment. That the 26 Republicans who sided with most Democrats in stopping the extension may be a sign that the new political paradigm in Washington is for real. The vote also proves that should a genuine, third party evolve out from the Tea Party, they will have a definite impact on the legislative process even if their numbers are few at the beginning.
Related Articles:
Setback for terror investigations with failure to renew patriot Act
Tea Party Bloc Thwarts Patriot Act Extension
Patriot Act extension fails in the House by seven votes
February 9th, 2011 at 7:48 am
This is great. We need to protect our constitution and this is why we elected the TEA party members. Let’s hope they don’t get renewed by simple majority before the end of the month.
Anyone who trades freedom for security deserves neither.
February 9th, 2011 at 8:16 am
This is one of the most encouraging signs I’ve seen yet from the Tea Party. I’ve directed my fair share of criticism toward the group, which I think was deserved. But I’m more than happy to give credit where credit is due. Great to see some free thinking in the House, especially when it’s of the pro-liberty sort.
February 9th, 2011 at 9:01 am
I suppose that they feel the crisis in the war is over.
I don’t like government oversight in our economy or our personal lives. However, the war is comming here. We are on the defensive. It can only be a matter of time before it reaches us, on a consistent basis.
February 9th, 2011 at 9:02 am
@ Rhay & Jason
Yes, this vote was the ‘proof in the pudding’ that the Tea Party will shake things up. Also, that they are not the monolithic extension of the GOP.
February 9th, 2011 at 9:09 am
@Joe
No, I don’t think they believe the war on terror is over. More like they believe, as I do, that neither the Patriot Act nor DHS has really made us any safer.
Most terror plots which have been foiled, that we know of, were the result of vigilant, ordinary citizens noticing something suspicious and calling the authorities.
February 9th, 2011 at 9:34 am
“Anyone who trades freedom for security deserves neither.”
Then I guess we should take both away from our troops.
I love Ben but this is really an inaccurate and disingenuous statement.
Americans have consistently given up tons of freedoms and made sacrifices for theirs and others freedoms.
I’m kinda with Joe on this seeing as how at the same time today Napolitano came out saying the threat of domestic radical Islam has and is growing.
I think its all bullsht.
As soon as something needs to be surveyed I’m willing to bet government will make up the necessary rules as it goes along.
In addition, blessings coming from Ron Paul mean absolutely nothing as hes as wrong on national security as anyone’s ever been by eluding to the opinion that America brought radical Islams attacks upon itself.
Peter King will have some very un-PC hearings coming up that are going to be in very stark contrast to this.
February 9th, 2011 at 9:44 am
“More like they believe, as I do, that neither the Patriot Act nor DHS has really made us any safer. ”
If memory serves me correctly both had great contributions till dickhead re-staffed it with “the system worked” ass-holes.
Many foiled plots go unreported for obvious security reasons
February 9th, 2011 at 9:51 am
Ooh the plot thickens in the conservative camp.
February 9th, 2011 at 10:09 am
If memory serves me correctly both had great contributions till dickhead re-staffed it with “the system worked” ass-holes.
Many foiled plots go unreported for obvious security reasons
So how do you know they happened? Where is the evidence of these “great contributions”? Assuming they exist, how do they weigh against the innumerable civil liberty violations that enabled them?
I get that you see this differently than I do, which is fine. But you can’t just dismiss concerns about this stuff with a wave of the hand. Some of us take our natural rights pretty seriously.
February 9th, 2011 at 10:48 am
“So how do you know they happened? Where is the evidence of these “great contributions”? Assuming they exist, how do they weigh against the innumerable civil liberty violations that enabled them?”
“enumerable”
I dont recall one case against the patriot act succeeding other than Padilla.
No, I cant prove anything anymore than we can prove Obama actually quit smoking.
But its rather bullshtty on your part to not acknowledge the fact that our surveillance and scores because of it are not for public consumption for obvious reasons.
Total transparency does not mean you give your enemies a heads up to everything you know…DUH
February 9th, 2011 at 11:01 am
“enumerable”
Um, no. Innumerable.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innumerable
But its rather bullshtty on your part to not acknowledge the fact that our surveillance and scores because of it are not for public consumption for obvious reasons.
How am I refusing to acknowledge this? I’m just saying there’s no way we can declare that these institutions “work” without real data. There might be good reasons why said data is unavailable, but that doesn’t mean we can just assume that a true vindication of the PATRIOT Act is sitting in a vault somewhere in the pentagon. We don’t know what we don’t know.
February 9th, 2011 at 11:06 am
“So how do you know they happened? Where is the evidence of these “great contributions”? Assuming they exist, how do they weigh against the innumerable civil liberty violations that enabled them?”
“innumerable”?
The only successful case against the Patriot Act was Padilla.
Really, that’s kind of a bullshtty return.
How do you know it didn’t have any great contributions ?
One with any sense would have to look at its duration and applications.
One way to look at it is this way…
When Obama was campaigning he pi$$ed all over the patriot act. As soon as he got his first privy Intel briefing as POTUS he turned around and put it on steroids.
Coming from someone whose favorite past time is downsizing and minimizing our enemy that say volumes.
In addition, I’m sure any cursory tour of the internet could dig up plenty of “successful” examples. I’ll see what I come up with in few minutes, even though its common knowledge that we’ve gained a wealth of info due to efforts led by the act
February 9th, 2011 at 11:07 am
Yeah, I went to make corrections and the fckin thing submitted itself.
February 9th, 2011 at 11:09 am
“How am I refusing to acknowledge this? I’m just saying there’s no way we can declare that these institutions “work” without real data.”
And theres no way to determine they didnt either as for “OBVIOUS” reason some things are kept under wraps.
What dont you understand about that ?
Should we just show our whole hand to our enemies ?
Let them know just how close we are to their asses ?
HUH ? Please, gimme a break
February 9th, 2011 at 11:14 am
Heres one good source.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4756706
“Access to Internet Records Without a Court Order
Section 212 of the Patriot Act allows an Internet service provider to disclose electronic communications directly to law enforcement, without waiting for a court order, if there’s an immediate danger of physical injury. The Justice Department credits the provision with allowing it to apprehend Jared Bjarnason in April 2004.
Bjarnason had sent an e-mail to the El Paso Islamic Center in Texas, threatening to burn the center’s mosque to the ground if hostages in Iraq were not freed within three days. The government says FBI agents used Section 212 to investigate the case, allowing them to quickly identify and arrest Bjarnason before he could harm the mosque.
NPR’s Larry Abramson, Maria Godoy and Katie Gradowski contributed to this report.
February 9th, 2011 at 11:19 am
And another…
“The report says between the Sept. 11 attacks and May 5, Justice Department terrorism investigations led to charges against 310 people, of whom 179 were convicted or pleaded guilty. The Patriot Act, it says, was instrumental in many of these cases.
The report provides 35 examples of how the law was used to prosecute alleged terror cells in New York, Oregon, Virginia and elsewhere; how it updated law enforcement tools to track such technology as cell phones and Internet communications; and how many of its provisions are used for other criminal probes including child pornography, computer hacking, kidnapping and illegal weapons sales.
- The report is posted on the Department of Justice’s Web site, http://www.usdoj.gov
February 9th, 2011 at 11:21 am
That was easy, shall I continue ?
February 9th, 2011 at 11:28 am
Calling Obama “dickhead”, wow, even if you don’t respect the man, respect the office.
February 9th, 2011 at 11:32 am
The average person in public is photographed 300 times a day by traffic cams, ATMs, store security without knowing it.
People like me spend 3 months in jail for a joint, subjected to 3 years probation and random drug testing.
The Patriot act never did a fckin thing to me
February 9th, 2011 at 11:52 am
This discussion isn’t going anywhere dude. We’re just gonna have to stay on our respective sides of the fence on this issue.
February 9th, 2011 at 12:02 pm
To bad they wont build a decent fence instead of worryin about this sht
February 9th, 2011 at 12:36 pm
FINALLY
“The bill would have extended surveillance powers against terrorism”
In America you are innocent until proven guilty. We have constitutional freedoms protecting us against unreasonable search and seizure and due process.
These powers don’t magically just target terrorists! Targeting terrorists is the best hope of our dragnet surveillance operations and unconstitutional law enforcement powers. In reality the collateral damage has been tremendous. The mainstream media spent nearly a decade not discussing cases of abuse of Patriot Act powers.
“Many claim the USA patriot Act violates civil liberties.”
In fact it does violate almost every word of the Bill of Rights. Are those civil liberties?
February 9th, 2011 at 12:37 pm
Bill Kristol, the top-dog neocon, gripes on Fox:
Hysteria is not a sign of health. When Glenn Beck rants about the caliphate taking over the Middle East from Morocco to the Philippines, and lists (invents?) the connections between caliphate-promoters and the American left, he brings to mind no one so much as Robert Welch and the John Birch Society. He’s marginalizing himself, just as his predecessors did back in the early 1960s.
February 9th, 2011 at 12:40 pm
Beck points out that Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush refrained from bombing “ancient Babylon” during their respective wars against Iraq. “Why?” he asks. “Because the Bible tells us that that is the seat right there of power of a global evil empire,” meaning that Islamic caliphate. Bush father and son each wanted to preserve the heart of a radical Islam caliphate? That seems to be what Beck is saying.
Beck depicts the Egyptian revolution as nothing more than a dark development in a covert three-dimensional global chess game that only he can suss out. The implication is that good Americans ought to fear and oppose the protests led by Egyptians calling for Hosni Mubarak’s departure and democratic reforms. And conservatives who endorse the demonstrators’ call for change and reforms are nothing but useful idiots doing the work of the clandestine Islamic-communist cabal.
February 9th, 2011 at 1:24 pm
@ Anonymous
Besides Padilla, can you cite me one example winning in court ?
“In America you are innocent until proven guilty.’
Its not a perfect system but still the best one on the planet.
We dont prosecute people til they’re proven guilty. What are you squawking about ?
“We have constitutional freedoms protecting us against unreasonable search and seizure and due process.”
“unreasonable”
There lies the argument we could carry back and forth all day.
The patriot act still lives with or without these three omissions and still carries many opportunities for violations as any law does if not operated in a moral manner.
I don’t see what everyone is so excited or pi$$ed about.
We have far greater, countless viable threats, to our liberties other than the Patriot Act coming across our borders and within an over regulating government, taxation etc… while the Patriot act has never hampered my ability to seek any of my constitutionally guaranteed pursuits.