Feingold going to filibuster Patriot Act

[TayTay]

I saw the end of today's Senate session and Frist said that the renewal of the Patriot Act is up next on the legislative agenda and that he was submitting a cloture petition because he believed the bill would be filibustered.

Anyone see this today. Sen. Feingold wasn't in the chamber so Sen. Boxer stood in for him and objected to making this legislation the next thing on the agenda, for Sen. Feingold.

Who is going to vote FOR the filibuster and AGAINST cloture? Any know who is committed to this?

[IndianaGreen]

1. DiFi and Durbin are voting for PATRIOT extension

being the Bush enabling pukes that they are.

[TayTay]

3. That already pased the Senate didn't it?

I thought the filibuster was for the entire renewal of the Patriot Act with the fixes that the Repubs wanted. Just about everyone voted for the one month extension. Are they all voting for the 'permanent' renewal of the Act?

Also, anyone know how this would play out? The cloture petition was sent out tonight. They can't vote on it until, what Thursday? Then they have 30 hours to debate it after cloture (if cloture passes.) Then the Senate goes on vacation next week.

How does it work?

[sandnsea]

12. There's the problem

Repeal, Extend, Filibuster, HUH?

I think we're on a final passage of the so-called compromise version. The message has never been clear on the Patriot Act. One crowd calling for repeal and calling the people who wanted it fixed DLC traitor sell-outs, when Feingold was one of the one's who wanted it fixed. It's no wonder people like Feintstein don't fight this stuff. The people who are calling for the fight don't even know what they're fighting for half the time. Too bad because it shouldn't have been that hard to get the thing fixed correctly.

[Patchuli]

13. Here's my letter to DiFi

who is my senator, unfortunately:

Dear Senator,

We were shocked and horrified to hear that you plan to vote to renew
the Patriot Act. There is nothing "patriotic" about stripping the rights of American citizens. We have lived as a free Americans all of our lives, thanks to our Constitution and our grandparents and parents who fought to keep us free. This "Patriot" (sic) Act is nothing but the systematic stripping of our rights. It is NOT making us safer! The president spying on us is NOT making us safer. But it is making us mad as hell! Maybe if this administration would actually do some work and find Osama Bin Laden instead of reading our email, we might ALL be safer!

Why are you supporting such a travesty of the Bush Administration?! Please give us an explanation for such a vote. And please remember, come November, the people will remember your response.

Sincerely,

xxxxxxxxx

[truebrit71]

15. Durbin is? Are you sure?

Durbin is among the very least of the chimp enablers.... :shrug:

[IndianaGreen]

17. Read it and weep!

Sen. Richard J. Durbin (Ill.), one of several Democrats who agreed to back the compromise yesterday, said "it falls far short" of the bill that was passed by the Senate last year but rejected by the House. "But if you measure it against the original Patriot Act . . . we've made progress" toward "protecting basic civil liberties at a time when we are dealing with the war on terrorism," Durbin said.

Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) called the compromise "a step in the right direction."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/09/AR2006020902140.html

[truebrit71]

22. Crap....

He will be hearing from me..."making progress" towards protecting civil liberties doesn't cut it.

[IndianaGreen]

18. And here is what DiFi said

Two Democrats supported the earlier measure and another two, Richard J. Durbin of Illinois and Dianne E. Feinstein of California, said they would support the latest version. "It is a substantial improvement," Ms. Feinstein said. "There are three basic changes. They are specific. They do improve the bill. I think it's important to get this done."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/10/politics/10patriot.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[IndianaGreen]

19. And what our Lion of Judah (Feingold) said...

"A few insignificant changes just doesn't cut it," Senator Russell D. Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, said in a statement. "I cannot support this deal, and I will do everything I can to stop it."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/10/politics/10patriot.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[flyarm]

21. and we should be surprised why??????????

hell they are going to fold on the NSA hearings as well..we have no party...
there is no opposition to this dicatorship..period..

fly

[FreedomAngel82]

33. Durbin?

I'm surprised.

[boobooday]

2. Time to commit a patriotic act . . . for once

And kill this thing.

Time to stand up with Senator Feingold.

[stepnw1f]

4. gee... imagine the Dems Doing Their Jobs

...sorry folks, but I am verrrrry cynical this evening when it comes to our supposed leadership. And I'm really starting to think we have a bigger problem than just machines. We need to know who our people are and what they really stand for. So... I'm trying harder from here on out to know who is who. Speculation as to why things happened the way they did today just does not matter...

I feel we may have lost a leader today, but then again, I'm more disappointed in him for giving up or giving in regardless.

[IndianaGreen]

5. I am sure that Schumer and Reid have their own plans about Feingold

They prefer someone that is mushy with the GOP, like they are.

[Cocoa]

16. did you forget they already filibustered the extension last year?

[LittleClarkie]

6. I assume the compromises made between the White House and the

Repubs in Congress didn't eliminate the provision to make the Patriot Act permanent. That's the thing that bothers me the most. No sunset on the law means it couldn't be revisited. That's the most filibusterable part for me.

I printed out Feingold's press release about the shortcomings of the Pat Act, put the toll free numbers of the Capital switchboard on it, and handed it out at my last Dem breakfast meeting. I called my OTHER senator about the issue as well. I got a vague comment from them that if the issues that Kohl objected to hadn't been fixed with the deal that the WH made with the Repubs, then he'd be likely to oppose the Pat Act again. I don't know if that means he'll filibuster though.

[TayTay]

9. I heard Frist say this on the floor tonight

just before they adjourned. He was anticipating a filibuster. Sen. Boxer had done an objection for Sen. Feingold, who was not on the floor, so I assumed that the filibuster attempt would be led by Sen. Feingold.

However, it was the tale end of the sesssion. I will look it up real quick in the Cong. Record tomorrow and make sure.

[Nite Owl]

7. I found this over at PFAW

The announced compromise deal reached this week regarding the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act failed to address key concerns regarding civil liberties and government overreaching. People For the American Way President Ralph G. Neas expressed his disappointment in senators’ failure to protect Americans’ rights to privacy and liberty.

“This is a missed opportunity to make desperately needed reforms in the PATRIOT Act, and for the Senate to play a crucial role in our system of checks and balances” said Neas. “Unfortunately, it appears that too many senators have decided to accept the unacceptable rather than stand up for the rights of ordinary Americans against unnecessary government intrusion. This deal means that the government can continue to legally demand your library and hospital records, even if you did nothing wrong.”

Among other major concerns, the compromise version of the bill fails to substantively reform Section 215 which allows federal agents to demand records from libraries, bookstores, hospitals and other businesses after meeting an unacceptably low standard of evidence. According to the text of the legislation, the government can continue to conduct such a search without presenting any evidence that the target is suspected of wrongdoing. People For the American Way has urged Congress to raise the standard in order to protect the privacy of innocent Americans.

“In light of Attorney General Gonzales’ recent testimony on the Bush Administration’s illegal warrantless wiretapping program, the American public has no reason to believe that the government will exercise restraint in its behavior. At a time when the administration has shown it’s willingness to bend and even break the law, it’s unconscionable that the Congress should fail to require real judicial oversight. This is part of a systematic attack on Americans’ freedoms,” said Neas.


http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=20448




Seems like there has been some kind of 'deal' and Feingold is going to stand up for what is right, the others have been most likely bought and this gives them a reason to just save face and be drawn back into the * fold.

[IndianaGreen]

10. Check the Feingold forum

Russ Feingold: Patriot Act Deal Falls Short on Protecting Freedoms

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=332x116

[Nite Owl]

20. Thanks,

I didn't know we had a Feingold forum.

[DemInDistress]

8. before they commit to any unpatriotic act we need to have a new

look into 911..far to many unanswered questions here as well as discrepancies with evidence. I wish my Democratic leaders would make this an issue for November. This will be the 5th anniversary of the 911 Murders and the stench of death that permeates the air is only exceeded by the stench coming out of this whitehouse.
anyone else agree?

[Laelth]

23. I agree that the administration's version ...

... of the story is a complete lie. Nothing short of controlled demolitions could bring those buildings down.

But MIHOP is too frightening for the American people to believe. I don't think we can win on this issue. I support the Party's unstated position on the issue (ignore it and do damage control on the power the event handed to the Repukes).

Patriot Act is part of that power. I agree with Senator Feingold's decision to resist its renewal.

-Laelth

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Laelth]

25. Thanks, but I don't need to see more evidence.

As I said, I firmly believe that controlled demolitions took those buildings down. I don't need to be convinced of that. I am fully in the MIHOP camp.

The question is, what are we going to do about it? We can and should impeach Bush and prosecute all the villains, but in order to do that we must take back Congress. If we make MIHOP a Democratic Party platform issue, we're doomed. The American people will either think we're cooks and not vote for us, or, if they believe us, they'll scream, "Why didn't you say so when it happened? Because you didn't stand up to the criminals after the atrocity, you enabled them and are, therefore, no better!"

I just don't think we can win from this position. Forgive me for my cowardice, please. It is strategic and well-intentioned.

-Laelth


Edit:Laelth--clarity.

[DemInDistress]

27. why didn't we say so when it happened? well its obvious..the

bush crime family withheld and still today denied requests for 911 information. What are they hiding? answers to the 911 murders and this issue remains unresolved for 100 million Americans.
No doubt if this tangible evidence is pounded into Americans who doubt the 911 ludicrous report we could get that new investigation. Lies,omissions,distortions,discrepancies,and irrefutable facts do dot make a conspiracy theory.
I feel your not the one who needs to be convinced a new investigation of 911 is in order its just how to go about it..
Well my friend we are working hard here in NYC on doing just that. Its the media who need to pick this up and alert the masses,.recently scholars for 911 launched a site that is powerful and as the 5th anniversary gets closer who knows ..one more thing if the 911 heat becomes too hot I see the bush crime family attacking america again and then imposing Martial Law..

I am an ally not the enemy..

[Laelth]

29. That's very true.

The truth has been deliberately withheld, but I don't think the American people will understand that, nor do I think they will forgive us for it. Look, the truth about Iraq was deliberately withheld from Democrats in Congress, but you still see people here ... Democrats no less ... attacking Democrats who voted for the war resolution.

No, sorry. We can no longer confront 9-11 head on. We must simply resist the power that the Repukes have seized as a result of it.

-Laelth

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Laelth]

34. These are the sane ones, IMHO

http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html

and

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/towers/index.html

And how many times do I have to repeat that I agree that 9-11 was an inside job? I disagree with you only on what we should do about it.

-Laelth

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[acmejack]

28. Many will never accept it period.

And the sad fact is just like the Iraqis, a majority here would rather have security than democracy. I'm sorry, but that si the simple fact of the matter, we live among cowards. Jefferson, Paine, Franklin, and their compatriots, who risked all would most certainly be appalled.

[gordianot]

11. I would have preferred Alito.

[IndianaGreen]

14. Feingold joined Kerry in the Alito filibuster

He was among the first to call for the filibuster.

[radio4progressives]

26. Text Transcript of Speech (link)

As Prepared For Delivery From the Senate Floor

February 15, 2006

Mr. President, it will come as no surprise that I’d like to talk about the Patriot Act today. I strongly oppose proceeding to consideration of S. 2271, which is legislation introduced by some of my friends and colleagues to implement the deal on the Patriot Act that was struck with the White House last week. Some may argue that there’s no harm in passing a bill that could charitably be described as trivial. But protecting the rights of law-abiding Americans is not trivial. And passage of S. 2271 is the first step toward passage of the flawed Patriot Act conference report. I will oppose both measures and I am prepared to explain at length my reasons for doing so.

While I greatly respect the Senators who negotiated this deal, I am gravely disappointed in the outcome. The White House would agree to only a few minor changes to the same Patriot Act conference report that could not get through the Senate back in December. These changes do not address the major problems with the Patriot Act that a bipartisan coalition has been trying to fix for the past several years. They are, quite frankly a fig leaf to allow those who were fighting hard to improve the Act to now step down, claim victory, and move on. What a hollow victory that would be, and what a complete reversal of the strong bipartisan consensus that we saw in this body just a couple months ago. What we are seeing is quite simply a capitulation to the intransigent and misleading rhetoric of a White House that sees any effort to protect civil liberties as a sign of weakness. Protecting American values is not weakness, Mr. President. Standing on principle is not weakness. And committing to fighting terrorism aggressively without compromising the rights and freedoms this country was founded upon – that’s not weakness either. We’ve come too far and fought too hard to agree to reauthorize the Patriot Act without fixing any of the major problems with the Act. A few insignificant, face-savings changes just don’t cut it. I cannot support this deal, and I strongly oppose proceeding to legislation that will implement it.

I understand the pressure that my colleagues have been under on this issue, and I appreciate all the hard work that they have done on the Patriot Act. It has been very gratifying to work on a bipartisan basis on this issue. It is unfortunate that the White House is so obviously trying to make this into a partisan issue, because it sees some political advantage to doing so. Whether the White House likes it or not, this will continue to be an issue where both Democrats and Republicans have concerns, and we will continue to work together for changes to the law. I am sure of that.

cont..

http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/statements/06/02/2006215.html

[NativeTexan]

39. He IS a hero, no doubt.

And I still can't understand why ANYONE who cares about civil liberties would EVER vote for ANYTHING that starts with the word "PATRIOT"!! THAT, my friends, is a big, bad bear trap, not to mention the red flags that should go off!!

[sasha031]

30. I just wrote to one of my Senator Kerry

next it will be Kennedy...

:spank: it's a full time job keeping up with these rat bastards

[FreedomAngel82]

32. Go Feingold!

[radio4progressives]

36. it so saddens me to find these threads at the bottom of the screen

why it isn't at the top on a 24/7 basis (in a manner of speaking) is beyond comprehension, trying to fathom the meaning of progressive DU'ers not putting this issue front and center above the Cheney shooting, above the Ann Coulter bull shit, even above the Hackett brouhaha.

I just don't understand it.

[radio4progressives]

37. The Debate is going on right now on C-Span...

please contact your senators - to back Feingold's concerns.

[mdmc]

38. kick for Boxer

it took courage to hold the floor...

[veness]

40. kick. n/t