House Narrowly Defeats Bill To Stop NSA From Collecting Phone Records From All Citizens
Here is a list of Representatives Who Voted against the amendment. I'd be making calls if my representative voted no:
http://www.opencongress.org/vote/2013/h/...
http://www.opencongress.org/vote/2013/h/...
This link looks to provide the right data:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/11...
that surprised me.
For instance: I (a Conservative) respect standing "Law and Order", and the Patriot Act is THE current law.
I also respect "Liberty"...and the current administrations bastardization of the Patriot Act is a pox on our liberty.
The Amendment was not written narrowly enough to resolve both issues, and failed for that reason. A better thought out Amendment will accomplish this....
There is also this tendency to not identify bad law, and instead blame bad people. It's my position that the Patriot Act itself is bad law. A very similar episode with data collection (AT&T) happened under GW Bush and there wasn't much outcry from conservatives then, while there was from the libs. Bad law will be abused no matter what the administration is, and we shouldn't be partisan about calling a spade a spade.
The present threat is apolitical, and placing blame on either party is a mortal flaw.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DohRa9lsx...
9/11 changed the world as we know it, and it may not return in our near future...since we are still walking in the cross-hairs of the enemy.
When you contemplate that last sentence, you may realize that relaxing our guard is currently 'chic', but not exactly smart.
Like I already said, but no one wants to address: the failed amendment was emotionally written for public consumption, with little thought to all of the parameters. A better amendment will be proposed...by saner men...that sees all of the issues evenly.
you do not get to determine who is "saner" who has more "smarts." I agree the amendment was not perfect, however, showing support for defunding was a huge start toward s taking back the 4th amendment. Better in what way? what do you recommend?
If the current administration has legal answers to what loopholes they used to do this, then we write those loopholes out.
I reserve my right to define "sanity"...since I assume that anyone else's definition is totally insane.
The old adage "don't throw out the baby with the bath water" comes to mind.
This will be rewritten by the House with more consideration to the initial intent of the Homeland Security Act, which has been bastardized by this administration. And it will surely be passed....
Cooler heads need to prevail in the Congress, and in here.
Is the author of the amendment leaving some dirty little secret out when he explains it here: ?
http://amash.house.gov/speech/amash-nsa-...
What do you consider the overreach?
This section alone could enable yet another Boston style attack, if the Boston bombers were suspected, but not already under investigation under Section 215.
I am reading the amendment with a fine tune comb, and I may change my position.
Stay tuned, sports fans....
This amendment was saying if you want to gather data on an individual, you have to formally declare they are a target of an investigation, and that may mean an appearance before the FISA court to explain just why the proposed target is suspicious. The success ratio on getting that approval out of FISA is darn near 100%.
Your point about Boston is interesting to me because even with this "monitor everything" approach, it failed to prevent the Boston bomber attack. How can taking it away "enable" another attack when keeping it in place did not "disable" it?
Maybe the problem is we're awash in meaningless data?
FISA is hidden from review, and is ultimately a star chamber. They have no visible regulation.
Everything that we request from the government is stamped: TOP SECRET.
And you can't question TOP SECRET, because your evidence will be, well, TOP SECRET.
Catch 22...brought to life.
So. I rely on the politicians that I trust to have more intel than I will EVER have. If they see a problem, then I will search for anything that refutes that.
The Boston Bombers could prove both of our cases: You say "why" didn't we figure them out before the deed. That could be because my research says that actual phone conversations are not listened to, if the party is not targeted under Section 501. They are gathered, and stored.
The gathering of phone records seems to be the issue here, and the initial stories had us all believe that we are being listened to 24/7. That seems to be false (the sheer logistics of doing this should have answered that).
The possible use of the Boston Bombers phone records could be to find like minded deviates that are planning more of the same. That would be useful.
I don't have the answers, but I am not ready to have a knee jerk reaction to anything that passes, or fails, in Congress...until I can exhaust my research options.
Considering the trend lately, I am surprised it was as close as it was.
When so many chicken littles are elected that our fundamental rights to privacy are sacrificed to their paranoia is it any wonder that congress has such a low approval rating? They are either power hungry or paranoid. Either way we and the constitution are being disrespected.