The official blog of the Libertarian Party
October 09, 2007
Democrats Sell-Out on FISA (Again)
When the Democrats passed the amendments to FISA in an 11th hour decision that allowed them to take their hallowed monthly vacation, it was nothing less than a sell-out to the Bush administration at the expense of treasured civil liberties. There are many things to get mad over in this situation: conceding to the Bush administration just to go on vacation, using civil liberties as a political football and going far beyond what the Bush administration had asked for are just a few.
Despite all of this, the metaphorical salt in the wound would have to be the fact that the Democrats decry foul at any Administration indiscretion. But despite this betrayal, the Democrats at least has the foresight to put a sunset clause on the Amendments for six months, where they could at least revisit the issue when travel plans permitted.
However, it appears Democrats are willing to back down yet again to the Bush administration:
Two months after vowing to roll back broad new wiretapping powers won by the Bush administration, Congressional Democrats appear ready to make concessions that could extend some of the key powers granted to the National Security Agency.
This time around it isn't that Democrats want to go on vacation and the President isn't holding it above their heads. This time, it's because Democrats have just lost their spine (if they ever had one to begin with):
As the debate over the N.S.A.'s wiretapping powers begins anew this week, the emerging legislation reflects the political reality confronting the Democrats. While they are willing to oppose the White House on the conduct of the war in Iraq, they remain nervous that they will be labeled as soft on terrorism if they insist on strict curbs on intelligence gathering.
Nobody in power seems to realize that the reason Congressional ratings are at historical lows is because of a failure to stand up to the president, and this certainly is the wrong way to reverse course. While House Democrats have certainly put up proposals that make the FISA amendments easier to swallow, they in no way change the fact that even a compromise would not alter abhorrent nature of what the Bush administration is asking for.
But this seems to be the modus operandi of the current political system. One party makes an outrageous demands, the other party blocks it [with the exception of this case when Dems. didn't even put up a fight], then the two make a compromise that is not entirely acceptable, but compared to the original demand, comparatively better.
In the end, the American public is given the leftovers of a meal neither party completely wanted to finish.
Posted by Andrew Davis at October 9, 2007 02:48 PM
Reader Comments:
No matter how many times the dems have buckled and have failed to act as an opposition party, you can never really get used to it. To them, it's a game, a job, whatever.
Their incompetence, both rep and dem, affects my life, my loved ones lives, and so many others here and abroad.
What's the point of two party or "multi party" system when they act as one party with mild infighting? The democrats even as a majority are spineless rubber stamping submissives. You'd think w/ all the crap that this administration has put everyone through, the dems would grow a set and stand up a little. But, I guess they'd need to vote on their own pay raises first.
The Democrats need to grow a backbone by standing up to the neocon and the Religious Right factions of the G.O.P., but I wouldn't hold my breath.
The question remains, what are you going to do about it?
What's up with the mainstream media distortion. It is laughable to blame the Democratic party for the FISA legislation. There are some Democrats who voted for it, but the vast majority of Republicans supported it.
S. 1927 - A bill to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to provide additional procedures for authorizing certain acquisitions of foreign intelligence information and for other purposes.
The Senate voted for it in Roll Call Vote No. 309, August 3, 2007. The count was 60 Yeas - 28 Nays - 12 Not Voting. 16 Democrat Senators, 43 Republican Senators, and Lieberman (In-CT) voted Yea. 27 Democratic Senators and Sanders (In-VT) voted Nay. Not One Republican Senator voted against it. Harry Reid voted against it.
The House voted for it in Roll Call Vote No 836. The total was 227 Yea - 183 Nay - 23 Not Voting. 186 Republican House members and 41 Democratic House members voted Yea. 181 democratic House members and 2 Republican House Members voted Nay. Pelosi voted Nay.
Ron Paul couldn't be bothered to appear for the vote that day. He must have been focusing on the $5 million in campaign contributions, and forgot about standing in Defense of The Constitution and Liberty.
We have a democratic republic with three branches of government. The executive branch may request legislation if they think new authority is needed to intercept communications of a new type of advasery. Should the legislative branch style something that meets that need, if it passes constitutional muster, what are the complaints about?
Current legislation has it that if a foreign national on a watch list makes an international call into the U.S., if the citizenshhip of the recipient is unknown, a FISA warrent is still required. Balanced enough?
If someone with standing files a suit about damage because of communication intercepts, freedoms are protected with our system of laws in our courts. If someones freedoms have already been compromised, where is the damaged party and where is the suit?
Um,
Since when has intercepting communications from a war/conflict zone to the US been called "domestic wiretapping", and since when was a warrant required?
Did Roosevelt need one to listen in on phone calls from Berlin to NYC in 1943?
I wish the Libertarian Party would call for at least an ABOLITION of the CIA, FBI, FCC, NSA, DEA, Fed Reserve, Corporate Welfare, and Warfare altogether if they really cared about peace and civil liberties. And of course most of the useless US Depts would be nice since they're in need of total reform given my experience as a contractor working with federal employees, most of whom were UTTERLY lazy. PATHETIC that neither party is against those welfare queens as well !
maxpayne: First of all, I love your video game.
Secondly, I think we're all in agreement as to the worth of nearly all of the US Depts, but in my opinion, it would be better if the Party were taken seriously before making such demands.
"Did Roosevelt need one to listen in on phone calls from Berlin to NYC in 1943?"
Yes. Absolutely.
"Current legislation has it that if a foreign national on a watch list makes an international call into the U.S., if the citizenshhip of the recipient is unknown, a FISA warrent is still required. Balanced enough?"
Depends on what it takes to get that warrant. Anyone remember when Steve Jackson Games was raided in the 90s using an unsigned warrant? There were LOTS of things done that weren't strictly legal at the time. But it was papered over, precedents were set, and the same armed, forcible rape of a legitimate business would barely make a page 8 story nowadays.
So no, until I find out what it takes for wiretappers to procure that authority, 'FISA warrant' doesn't comfort me any.
Totally off the subject (sorry!), but I can't find any real "official" Libertarian stance on abortion. So, I thought I'd post the question here. There are abortion issue indications in the blogs but that's no way to glean a real party position. Is this obvious omission by design? It's such a hot topic. Ron Paul is all for overturning Row v. Wade. Bizarre. Anyone? Let me know. Thanks! stillwater@rock.com
| 
No matter how many times the dems have buckled and have failed to act as an opposition party, you can never really get used to it. To them, it's a game, a job, whatever.
Their incompetence, both rep and dem, affects my life, my loved ones lives, and so many others here and abroad.
Posted by: Michael at October 9, 2007 03:25 PMWhat's the point of two party or "multi party" system when they act as one party with mild infighting? The democrats even as a majority are spineless rubber stamping submissives. You'd think w/ all the crap that this administration has put everyone through, the dems would grow a set and stand up a little. But, I guess they'd need to vote on their own pay raises first.