The Only Eight Senators Who Think Extending The Patriot Act Deserves More Discussion
from the way-too-small-a-list dept
Tragically, this list is way too small, but as expected, the Senate has moved much closer to extending some controversial spying provisions of the Patriot Act, without any modifications or new oversight. As we noted when the "deal" was brokered, the Senate leadership (of both parties) hoped to avoid having to actually debate the issue, and the Senate has now voted to skip over any such debate by an overwhelming margin: 74-8. Only eight Senators voted against this move, and they deserve to be highlighted for actually standing up for American principles against over aggressive government surveillance:- Max Baucus (Montana)
- Mark Begich (Alaska)
- Dean Heller (Nevada)
- Jeff Merkley (Oregon)
- Lisa Murkowski (Alaska)
- Rand Paul (Kentucky)
- Bernie Sanders (Vermont)
- Jon Tester (Montana)
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: cloture, patriot act, senators
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Michael Bennet (CO)
Roy Blunt (MO)
Scott Brown (MA)
Sherrod Brown (OH)
Thad Cochran (MS)
Bob Corker (TN)
Richard Durbin (IL)
Lindsey Graham (SC)
James Inhofe (OK)
Mike Lee (UT)
Claire McCaskill (MO)
Mark Pryor (AR)
James Risch (ID)
Marco Rubio (FL)
Richard Shelby (AL)
David Vitter (LA)
Sheldon Whitehouse (RI)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Wow... Next thing you know, there will be an Objectivist party in the works.
*Thinks about the Tea Party*
Oh, wait...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Once again, we discover that civil liberties is not a partisan issue...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"Stop trampling my rights... Oh, both sides came together to trample my rights as one? Well that makes it all better."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wyden?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wyden?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wyden?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wyden?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wyden?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
+1 Against (sorta)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: +1 Against (sorta)
What happens if they gain significant traction to become an actual third party?
HOW does a party become a viable option to Republican or Democrat?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: +1 Against (sorta)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: +1 Against (sorta)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: +1 Against (sorta)
On the other hand, what would the difference be between the two? ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: +1 Against (sorta)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: +1 Against (sorta)
The solution is that we need fourth parties. If we simultaneously fracture Republicans and Democrats, then folks might not feel like they're wasting their vote anymore.
It's more possible than you might think. Consider all the conservatives who hate Republicans and all the liberals who hate Democrats.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: +1 Against (sorta)
*cough*approval voting*cough*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: +1 Against (sorta)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: +1 Against (sorta)
The closest a party has ever got was the green party with the nader/leduke ticket, they were only a percentage or two off. I would give you better numbers but I'm on my cell
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: +1 Against (sorta)
The rules for congress are completely different, and vary by state.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: +1 Against (sorta)
from Nader's Wiki
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: +1 Against (sorta)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Disgusting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This makes two
I hope that they get the idea that the privacy and due process rights granted by the Constitution are not something that can be tossed to the wind. I hope they realize that the people of this nation will not allow this to continue indefinitely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We get what we deserve
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We get what we deserve
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: We get what we deserve
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We get what we deserve
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We get what we deserve
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No compromises
We are supposed to be defending freedoms.
If you take those freedoms to insure security, there is nothing worth living or dying for.
If the people in government CAN NOT keep us safe WHILE keeping us free, they are the wrong people for the job. PERIOD.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
one in a row NEW RECORD
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
*delete high score table*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Misnaming to mislead...
Why is it even the "Patriot Act" in the first place? (To mislead, and make opposition seem anti-american scum, obviously.) Should be the "Big Brother's Watching You Act", or something like that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Misnaming to mislead...
Osama may have gotten himself executed but he did destroy an important part of America and so he did get a partial victory. I can only hope that since the US government is not willing to give up the total power they stole from the US people in order to make the defeat of Bin Laden complete the death of America's boogie man will result in new found courage to make the politicians rescind an act that had no real effect on terrorism but a profound effect on Americanism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Misnaming to mislead...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Misnaming to mislead...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
unpatriotic act
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Regardless, please Vote for Ron Paul.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sanders & Paul
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Odd
[ link to this | view in chronology ]