Congress, Once Again, Looks To Extend Patriot Act With Little Or No Debate
from the the-sun-never-sets dept
When the Patriot Act first passed, there were (quite reasonable) concerns from many folks in the civil liberties world, who were worried about aspects of the bill that seemed to go well beyond reason, in a hysterical knee-jerk reaction to the terrorist attacks of 2001. In order to mollify those concerned, Congress put in some "sunset" provisions, which would have certain aspects of the Patriot Act expire at a particular time. Last year, parts of the Patriot Act were set to expire, and many people hoped that it would open up some opportunities to better protect basic civil liberties. However, with it being an election year and no one wanting to look "soft" on terrorism, Congress had little discussion about the matter and simply decided to re-up the entire Patriot Act, saying they'd really (no, really) review the provisions this year. Amusingly, in a typical Congressional obfuscatory move, the extension of the Patriot Act was buried in the "Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act." Yeah.So here we are in 2011, and where's the debate and the promised effort to sunset the worst aspects of the Patriot Act? After all, in the past year, there's been even more evidence that the feds have massively abused their ability to get information on people without proper oversight. And while it hasn't been reported on at all in the press, Julian Sanchez's eagle eyes spotted the fact that Rep. Mike Rogers has introduced yet another one-year
So, it's now appearing that those "sunsets" in the Patriot Act -- which should actually go into effect, given the tremendous evidence of abuse by the feds -- were a mere fiction, that Congress will just paper over each and every year.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: patriot act, renewal, sunset
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Tax cuts expiring? Punt 2 years. Government spending? Punt 5 days, then punt some more. Patriot Act? Punt another year or two and call it a day.
Republicans know if they control both houses and / or the whitehouse next time around, the Patriot act will be safe for that term.
Small minded politics from the people who brought you the chemical weapons version of "Where's Waldo?" in Iraq. (Answer: There is no Waldo).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Just as importantly, it's a loser with the electorate as well. While many here squeal about their rights, many people prefer the idea that the government is taking at least some form of action to get to terrorists. I am not debate if it is effecient, only the view that many people have.
You can just imagine the Republican't election commercials for 2012: "Obama, so friendly to terrorists, that he veto'ed the successful Patriot act, setting back law enforcement efforts years. Barack Hussein Obama, he's not on your side".
It's a punt. After he gets re-elected and no longer has to face the electorate again (term limits) he will then take tougher stands on this stuff. Until then, it isn't politically very good for him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Oh yes, that all democrats are great, and the republiCAN'Ts want to ruin america.
Wake up, realize that both parties suck, and life will start making sense again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Like I said before, he's abused the power more than Bush did. Why on earth would I believe he in any way opposes the thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Temporary" acts
The original enactment of the 1662 Licensing Act (14 Car.II. c.33) was limited to two years.
The act was successively renewed until 1679. After a lapse, it was renewed again in 1685 for a further seven years. Then, later, it was continued to the end of parliament.
In 1695, it finally expired without renewal.
This example is not a solitary one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Temporary" acts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "Temporary" acts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "Temporary" acts
Yeah, and the powers that be at this time are going to do their damndest to make sure we can never have another revolution. No guns, no rights, no talking... just shut up and give us your money and be a good little sheep.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Constitutional Authority?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Confusion
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mark my words: The tax will NEVER go down and politians are nothing more than a bunch of liers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The biggest employer around here is the Anniston Army Depot and various defense contractors. We also have a lot of DHS training on local bases, of which there are several.
Mike Rogers is trading our personal liberties for pork.
Anyone in this district should find someone else to support.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The people who showed up for Mr Obama's campaign rally in Arizona last night were not overcome with grief. They were not in shock and mourning over the shooting of a representative, and the death of a judge. Instead they were whooping it up, yelling, “Hooray for our side.” Clapping and cheering.
Whether you approve or disapprove of arguing politics with guns, the mood of last night's fourteen thousand in Arizona —shown on the TV nationwide— was not somber, and reflective.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
And seriously, if you think corporations are the way to go for employment, you're the cause of the problem you're bitching about. Work for one of the small businesses that employ half of the nation. Start your own business.
Do not, however, whine because you get paid minimum wage for a job that I could train a retarded monkey or even a teenager to do in an evening. If you're not smart enough to gain the skills or education for a better job, the only value you have to society is as an example to others of what happens when you're abysmally stupid.
I think I'll stop this rant now before I say what I really think of tools like you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Just a minor point, "corporation" and "small business" are not mutually exclusive. I have worked for two corporations with about 7 employees each.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I hope you realise that you don't have to be highly skilled to work hard. I guess the distinction doesn't matter to someone who apparently has the knowledge to train monkeys to do their bidding.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Constitution? What Constitution?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Constitution? What Constitution?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Constitution? What Constitution?
How? If a politician isn't corrupt to begin with, they are by the time they get into office.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Constitution? What Constitution?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patriot Act...
Anarchist are rioting in the streets.
Terrorism pervades our society!
WE NEED LAW AND ORDER!"
Adolf Hitler - 1933
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patriot Act...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patriot Act...
Damn, Godwin'd and yet a perfectly legitimate argument.
Sadly, another case of those who don't understand history are doomed to repeat. Of course politicians don't have to understand history...they make it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patriot Act...
i can see a tshirt now, with flags waving and a fox news logo on the back, a donkey and an elefent hugging
"that was said in 1933 by.....*back of shirt* adolf hitler"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And to make it all worse....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"...Looks To Extend Patriot Act With Little Or No Debate"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Different Party, Same Story...
It seems the reason is simple as to why this will continued to be renewed. If you vote against it and there is another attack you will be directly blamed for it. It is blatant CYA. Most politicians don't stand on principle and definitely aren't going to put their necks on the line for principles.
The Patriot Act will only go away when the government does something so bad that it will then get politicians that stand up for "rights of the people" and USE the event as a method of them gaining further political power.
Sadly, until there tide shifts and there is some benefit for not renewing it, they'll continue to take the safe/CYA route.
Freedom
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Different Party, Same Story...
It pains me to say that I am afraid this analysis is correct.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Keep trying, maybe one day you'll catch a real criminal. In the mean time keep pretending to look useful by continuing to catch people who go over the ridiculously low speed limit and by going after people who break ridiculous laws that shouldn't exist (ie: IP laws). Such petty "police work" is much easier and safer I suppose, it takes courage and effort to go after and stop real criminals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
patriot act
[ link to this | view in chronology ]