Key Fighter For Civil Liberties, Russ Feingold, Running To Return To The Senate
from the good-news dept
We've pointed out for years how strong a supporter of civil liberties Senator Ron Wyden has been, but the one guy who probably had an even stronger record on that front was Senator Russ Feingold. Feingold was the only Senator who consistently voted against the PATRIOT Act and increases to government surveillance. In fact he was the only Senator to vote against the PATRIOT Act in the first place. And, at that time, he gave a speech in which he accurately predicted how the NSA would abuse the PATRIOT Act:And under this new provisions all business records can be compelled, including those containing sensitive personal information like medical records from hospitals or doctors, or educational records, or records of what books someone has taken out of the library. This is an enormous expansion of authority, under a law that provides only minimal judicial supervision.If anything, Feingold underestimated how this provision would be used, because even he didn't predict it would be used to have phone companies hand over every record on every phone call. Feingold was also the first to raise the alarm about "secret interpretations" of the law, well before others started pointing that out as well.
Under this provision, the government can apparently go on a fishing expedition and collect information on virtually anyone. All it has to allege in order to get an order for these records from the court is that the information is sought for an investigation of international terrorism or clandestine intelligence gathering. That's it. On that minimal showing in an ex parte application to a secret court, with no showing even that the information is relevant to the investigation, the government can lawfully compel a doctor or hospital to release medical records, or a library to release circulation records. This is a truly breathtaking expansion of police power.
Thus it was ridiculous and disappointing to see Feingold voted out of office in the 2010 "Tea Party" wave. He lost to Senator Ron Johnson, a Tea Party favorite... who went on to vote in favor of key bills to expand the spying power of the intelligence community.
Feingold has now announced that he wants that Senate seat back, and will be challenging Johnson in the 2016 election:
"[L]et’s fight together for change. That means helping to bring back to the U.S. Senate strong independence, bipartisanship and honesty," Feingold said in a video announcing his campaign. "So today I'm pleased to announce that I'm planning to run for the United States Senate in 2016. And this effort begins with listening to you. "His announcement didn't mention anything about surveillance or civil liberties, but considering his track record on that front, he would be an important addition to the Senate on these key issues -- especially since we lost Senator Mark Udall in the last election, after he had picked up many of the civil liberties issues that Feingold used to champion.
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: civil liberties, patriot act, ron johnson, russ feingold, senate
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I thin the NSA/GCHQ had something to do with the Tories winning again in UK, too, while the only party that opposed mass surveillance got crushed...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Aye, Mate!
We'll be able to test the "Intelligence Community Interference" theory when Ron Wyden comes up for re-election.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I wouldn't get too excited...
It should be an interesting race.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I wouldn't get too excited...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Non-partisan?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Non-partisan?
In this case they are showing support for a 'liberal democrat', but I don't imagine that has much to do with his political leanings, so much as his stance on the mass spying going on in the US. If the person was a conservative republican, yet also supported the same stances with regards to mass spying, I imagine the message of support would be the same, as the label a person uses means nothing compared to what they do, and to a lesser extent what they say.
As evidence, consider the fact that before your comment I had no idea what party the individual in question belonged to. Why? Because nowhere in the article is it even mentioned, as it does not matter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Non-partisan?
My issue is that TD claims to be non-partisan but tends to laud democrats and lambaste republicans.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Non-partisan?
Given they don't even bother to list party affiliation unless it's somehow important to the story, believing it to be meaningless, instead focusing on what people are saying and/or doing, I'd say that would be true, even if I've never seen a statement where those who write for TD specifically say that they are non-partisan.
...but tends to laud democrats and lambaste republicans.
Probably because of their actions. If the democrats are, more often than not, acting in a manner that those who write for TD support, and the republicans aren't, then of course they're going to seem to be supporting the democrats and being critical of the republicans. That has nothing to do with party affiliation however, and everything to do with what the individuals in question are doing and saying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Non-partisan?
TD occasionally bashes Democrat senator Dianne Feinstein for a) rubber-stamping NSA spying on the US population without a warrant, b) being a giant hypocrite when she discovered that she and her staff had been on the receiving end, and c) her husband makes money off of this.
It's not a partisan thing, it's a douchebag-bashing thing. When they behave badly, we call them out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]