The Cyberpolitics Of Cyberbellicosity Cyberpushing Cybersecurity To Cyberprevent Cyberwar

from the cyber-cyber-cyber dept

Let's kick this off with an obligatory link to WillUsingThePrefixCyberMakeMeLookLikeAnIdiot.com. As Senator Harry Reid has declared that the Senate absolutely will vote on a cybersecurity bill soon, despite significant questions about the bills under consideration and about whether such a bill is really needed at all, Jim Harper points out the politics behind all of this (while also pointing out the ridiculousness of the overuse of the prefix "cyber" by coining "cyberbellicosity.")

First off, there's the fact that, for all the vague talks of "threats," the only real evidence of "cyberattacks" to date all seem to point to the US. So, if we're worried about attacks directed back at us, perhaps we shouldn't have kicked off the effort by showing the rest of the world how it's done. And, no, Senator Feinstein, the problem isn't the leak, but the action. As Harper points out:

The likelihood of attacks having extraordinary consequences is low. This talk of “cyberwar” and “cyberterror” is the ugly poetry of budget-building in Washington, D.C. But watch out for U.S. cyberbellicosity coming home to roost. The threat environment is developing in response to U.S. aggression.

This parallels the United States’ use of nuclear weapons, which made “the bomb” (Dmitri) an essential tool of world power. Rightly or wrongly, the United States’ use of the bomb spurred the nuclear arms race and triggered nuclear proliferation challenges that continue today. (To repeat: Cyberattacks can have nothing like the consequence of nuclear weapons.)

Of course, the "urgency" that we keep hearing about is almost certainly political. Should some attack actually happen, no politician wants to give his or her opponents the opportunity to point to their failure to pass "do something!" cybersecurity legislation during a campaign. As Harper points out, the real fear from politicians isn't a cyberattack, it's a political attack:

Senator Reid has gone hook, line, and sinker for the “cyber-9/11″ idea, of course. Like all politicians, his primary job is not to set appropriate cybersecurity policies but to re-elect himself and members of his party. The tiniest risk of a cyberattack making headlines to use against his party justifies expending taxpayer dollars, privacy, and digital liberties. This it not to prevent “cyber” attack. It is to prevent political attack.

He then goes on to highlight a bunch of former government officials who sent a letter to Senate leaders urging them to pass cybersecurity legislation "as soon as possible" since it's "critically necessary to protect our national and economic security." Of course, what the signatories of that letter really mean is that they want to protect their own "economic security." Every one of them has moved to the private sector and is in a position to profit greatly from a freakout over cybersecurity...

And yes, in answer to the URL I mentioned at the beginning, using cyber does, in fact, make you look like an idiot in most cases. But for the amount of profit and spying power at stake? It doesn't seem like many in DC care that much.

Filed Under: cybersecurity, cyberwar, harry reid

Sen. Harry Reid: The Postal Service Must Be Saved Because 'Seniors Love Junk Mail'

from the because-nothing-says-'human-contact'-like-something-addressed-to-'oc dept

You know a service is on its last legs when the best argument a person can make for its continued existence is both a) very likely untrue and b) incredibly depressing. The United States Postal Service, best known these days for its massive accounting losses and quarterly stamp price increases, is being forced to deal with the reality of a world that sends most of its mail via the internet. With deep cuts and office closures looming, Sen. Harry Reid took to the Senate floor to say a few words in its defense, as The Consumerist reports:

Speaking yesterday to his fellow Senators, Reid really sucked the air out of the room with this part of his "Save the USPS" speech:

"Elderly Americans rely on the United States Postal Service... I'll come home to my home here in Washington and there will be some mail there. A lot of it is what some people refer to as junk mail. But for the people that are sending that mail, it's very important. And, talking about seniors - Seniors LOVE to get junk mail. It's sometimes their only way of communicating or feeling they're part of the real world."

Here's Reid in "action:"



It's rare to see someone make a statement that undercuts the "essentialness" of the USPS so thoroughly, especially one made in its defense. If the best argument a person can come up with is that the Postal Service needs to remain intact in order to provide a point of contact between desperately lonely seniors and the companies that prey on them, then it's time to admit that maybe, just maybe, the "service" is actually more of a burden.

In fact, with "austerity" being the watchword (well, not here specifically, but all over Europe), maybe it's time to (and this is an unfortunate turn of phrase, but trust me, it gets worse...) kill two birds with one stone and cut off the flow of junk mail to seniors. Now that they won't have a third rejection letter from Publishers Clearing House to look forward to, perhaps they'll go more gracefully into that good night, thus reducing the strain on the already-overmatched Social Security fund.

Speaking of overmatched retirement funds, most the USPS's massive losses stem from having to prefund retiree health benefits, an issue that could be negated with another "two birds one stone" solution. The USPS could cut loose its potential retirees, shifting them from "mounting losses" category into the more profitable "willing recipient of mass mailing" demographic. We call that "win-win" where I come from (a rural Midwestern area known for its redundancy).

Or maybe it's time to privatize. The USPS seems to believe it can compete if the government takes the, uh, governor off rates and services. If so, the USPS will need to hit the ground running, something massive entities are rarely good at. As the Consumerist has shown, both FedEx and UPS are willing to step in to fill the void. The two companies already have a proven track record for getting packages from Point A to Point B (even if the final destination was supposed to be Point C) as well as making great strides in treating your packages with a government-like callous disregard. This may also hasten the adoption of paperless billing, which should prove to be a boon to the economy as the affected companies will be able to collect "convenience charges" for electronic transactions, something simply not possible in the era of horse-and-buggy pen-and-checkbook.

Of course, paperless billing requires an internet connection and the ability to navigate to secure sites without picking up a variety of obnoxious toolbars and pernicious malware, so maybe Harry Reid is right. Despite the fact that Grandma likely has over 96,000 hours of AOL packed into a file box in the hall closet, the internet can be a weird and dangerous place for those used to more analog experiences. And AOL itself is no help. Signing up for the service seems simple enough for those with landlines, but once you decide you no longer need its portal to the sanitized internet, getting them to cancel your service is about as simple as removing your own kidney. (Actually, it's more difficult than that. It's like trying to persuade the surgeon to remove the faulty kidney and instead being told that what you really want is a third kidney.)

If Senator Reid is right, and the USPS is the only thing standing between seniors and a not-all-that-untimely (but very lonely) death, thanks to its continuous flow of "human contact" via junk mail, perhaps the solution is to move some postal workers over to Meals-on-Wheels and let the private sector decide whether or not it wants the aching loneliness of America's growing elderly population on its hands. My guess is that no matter who's handling the delivery side of the business, junk mailers will still find a way to get their ads into the hands of general population.

As for Publishers Clearing House, it will have to make a few adjustments. For starters, it may have to stop pushing magazine subscriptions, as most magazines at this point are pamphlet-thin and nearly 75% ads. (Except for Reader's Digest Large Print Edition!) As the denizens of the internet march slowly towards their golden years, they're not going to have much patience for an information source with less interactivity than a PDF. And they're certainly not going to be checking the mailbox for contact with the outside world.

Filed Under: harry reid, usps

Senate Minority Leader McConnell Tells Reid/Leahy To Kill PIPA

from the ouch dept

Looks like the next domino in the SOPA/PIPA fight just fell. Tony Romm is reporting that Senate minority leader, Senator Mitch McConnell is calling on Democrats to drop PIPA. That has a high likelihood of killing off what little Republican support is left for PIPA, because where McConnell goes, so go most Republican Senate votes. As we predicted this morning, it's looking like this is becoming a partisan issue -- with the Republicans lined up with internet users... and Democrats lined up with a couple of big Hollywood studios who don't want to innovate. The real shame in that, of course, is that for many, many months, the only person keeping PIPA from moving forward was Senator Ron Wyden -- a Democrat... and it appears his entire party has totally abandoned him. I'm still worried this now becomes a partisan issue, but it's still pretty stunning that Democratic leadership appears to have made a really, really bad calculation on the politics of this bill.

Update: Here's McConnell's official statement:

“While we must combat the on-line theft of intellectual property, current proposals in Congress raise serious legal, policy and operational concerns. Rather than prematurely bringing the Protect IP Act to the Senate floor, we should first study and resolve the serious issues with this legislation. Considering this bill without first doing so could be counterproductive to achieving the shared goal of enacting appropriate and additional tools to combat the theft of intellectual property. I encourage the Senate Majority to reconsider its decision to proceed to this bill.”

Reading between the standard DC political lines... McConnell is making this partisan.

Filed Under: copyright, democrats, harry reid, mitch mcconnell, partisan, patrick leahy, pipa, protect ip, republicans, ron wyden, senate, sopa

Harry Reid Says He's Concerned PIPA Will Break The Internet, But We Must Move Forward With It, Because Of 'Jobs'

from the say-what-now? dept

In a short appearance on Meet the Press on Sunday, Senate leader Harry Reid continued to insist that the Senate intended to move forward with PIPA, despite the widespread concerns, despite the White House's statement against the bill, and despite multiple Senators -- including bill co-sponsors -- asking him to hold off putting the bill to a vote. What's stunning is how misleading Senator Reid is being here. First, he claims that the bill is about "jobs," despite a total lack of evidence that that's true. In fact, as has been noted plenty of times here, the part of the economy that is creating jobs -- the startup/tech sector -- is the one who gets burdened by this bill. David Gregory then responds by pointing out that people keep pointing out to him online that this bill isn't really about jobs, and will harm the internet. Reid then tries to pretend that this is a new revelation. He notes that it was "reported out of the committee unanimously" back in May. That's true, but that was back before most people understood the bill, or the internet had spoken out. Even then, many of us were quite clear in speaking out about why this bill was a problem. But Harry Reid pretends that it's "just in the last few weeks" that anyone has raised concerns." That's flat out ridiculous.

Next he claims that he's working with Senator Feinstein on this, since she's "in the middle" of the issue, representing both Northern and Southern California, where the issue is loudest. This would be the same Senator Feinstein who is so tone deaf to what's happening in her own state, that just weeks ago she insisted that she didn't know the tech industry was upset about the bill.

But the really stunning part? After these bizarre claims, he says, of those who have complained about the bill:

"I think they're right. I think it could create some problems. That's why I've spoken Senator Leahy, the Chairman of the Committee. I've written a letter to the ranking member Senator Grassley, saying that some issues have come up. I think this needs to be a winner for everyone -- not just for the content people.... so we need to work on this."

But then he still insists that they're going forward with the bill! He notes that he's expecting a "manager's amendment" from Leahy -- but Leahy has already said that the manager's amendment is just going to delay the implementation of the DNS issues. If Senator Reid really wants to make sure the bill is a "winner for everyone" then shouldn't we take some time to make sure that everyone's happy? It's doubly concerning that he appears to think these issues "just came up" in the past few weeks. That shows that he's totally and completely out of touch on the many months that people were speaking out against the problems of this bill. If anything that's even more reason to delay things, since Reid himself is admitting he's totally ignorant of the many, many, many problems that people have been discussing for months now.

It's such a politician's response: he pretends that he's in agreement with the concerns of everyone... but then immediately admits he's ignoring those concerns and pushing forward with a bad bill, which he clearly never understood, and which it appears he just found out there was criticism around, despite the fact it's been going on for months. Everything in this statement points to reasons not to vote on the bill on the 24th, and yet he wants to move forward with it. It's just stunning.

Filed Under: concerns, harry reid, interent, jobs, pipa, protect ip, senate, sopa

SOPA Delayed; Cantor Promises It Won't Be Brought To The Floor Until 'Issues Are Addressed'

from the holding-fire dept

Some late breaking news here: following Lamar Smith's announcement that the new manager's amendment for SOPA will remove DNS blocking (to be added back at a later date after it's been "studied"), Rep. Issa has announced that he will now postpone the "nerd" hearing that he was holding in the House Oversight Committee, which was originally scheduled for Wednesday. The key reason? Majority Leader Eric Cantor has promised him that he will not bring the bill to the floor unless there's real consensus on the bill. That's big news -- though, as Issa notes in his statement, it's worrisome that Senator Reid still seems to want to move forward with PIPA:

"While I remain concerned about Senate action on the Protect IP Act, I am confident that flawed legislation will not be taken up by this House. Majority Leader Cantor has assured me that we will continue to work to address outstanding concerns and work to build consensus prior to any anti-piracy legislation coming before the House for a vote,” said Chairman Issa. “The voice of the Internet community has been heard. Much more education for Members of Congress about the workings of the Internet is essential if anti-piracy legislation is to be workable and achieve broad appeal.”

"Earlier tonight, Chairman Smith announced that he will remove the DNS blocking provision from his legislation. Although SOPA, despite the removal of this provision, is still a fundamentally flawed bill, I have decided that postponing the scheduled hearing on DNS blocking with technical experts is the best course of action at this time. Right now, the focus of protecting the Internet needs to be on the Senate where Majority Leader Reid has announced his intention to try to move similar legislation in less than two weeks."

Indeed. It is still important that Congress hears from "the nerds" and plenty of other experts concerning the implications of these attempts to regulate the internet, but if SOPA is not going to be rushed to the floor, such hearings and education can (and should) happen in due time, rather than rushing to get them in, just as Congress comes back into session. There are more important things for Congress to focus on.

Filed Under: darrell isa, delayed, dns, eric cantor, harry reid, hearings, lamar smith, pipa, protect ip, sopa

PIPA's Own Sponsors Backing Off Bill; Ask Senate To Hold Off On Voting [Updated!]

from the wow dept

It looks like the internet uprising really is having an impact. Senator Ben Cardin -- a co-sponsor of PIPA -- has put out a press release saying that he won't vote for the bill as written today, after hearing from many constituents. Oddly, he says he will remain a co-sponsor of the bill, but wants to amend the bill to take into account the concerns he's hearing.

Similarly, six other Senators, including two co-sponsors -- Senators Orrin Hatch, Chuck Grassley (the two co-sponsors) along with John Cornyn, Jeff Sessions, Mike Lee and Tom Coburn -- have asked Harry Reid not to bring the cloture vote he's promised to bring on the 24th. In other words, as many of us have been asking: don't rush this. This is huge news. With Senators -- including three co-sponsors -- coming out so forcefully to Harry Reid that this bill needs more time, Reid is much more likely to delay the cloture vote, and to leave PIPA aside for other business for the time being. Either way, the letter (embedded below) makes it clear that more debate on the issues in the bill were promised and never held. And, they note, that they're hearing more and more and more about the problems in the bill, and believe they should be discussed openly, before anyone is voting on cloture or on the bill itself.

All of this, by the way, is because tons of you (tons!) have stepped up and reached out to your Reps. and Senators and let them know that these bills are unacceptable. Let's see if Harry Reid, Patrick Leahy and Lamar Smith finally admit that they, too, can hear you.

Update: Harry Reid apparently cannot hear you. He has come out with a statement saying that the cloture vote will continue on January 24th, despite the concerns of so many Senators (even co-sponsors of the bill) because it's "too important to delay." No. He's wrong. What's too important to delay is a real careful look at the impact of such a bill.

Update 2: More and more Senators appear to be distancing themselves from the bill. The latest is Senator Pat Toomey who makes it clear he does not like any bill that involves the government being able to order blocks of links to certain websites -- something he calls "pretty disturbing."

Filed Under: ben cardin, chuck grassley, delay, harry reid, jeff sessions, john cornyn, mike lee, orrin hatch, pipa, protect ip, tom coburn

Las Vegas Review-Journal Publishes CEA OpEd Calling Out Senator Harry Reid Killing Innovation By Supporting PIPA

from the wronghaven dept

Well, this is interesting. The Las Vegas Review-Journal (LVRJ) -- yes, the very newspaper that was the driving force behind giant copyright troll Righthaven, and whose then-publisher insisted that a single non-commercial infringement was the equivalent of stealing his car -- has published an anti-PIPA/SOPA OpEd piece, written by CEA boss Gary Shapiro. Shapiro doesn't mince words, talking about the importance of innovation and directly calling out Nevada Senator Harry Reid for supporting the bill:

Las Vegas' role as a leader in innovation is somewhat ironic, given that Nevada Sen. Harry Reid, who has never once visited the CES, is a leader in efforts that oppose the type of innovation and technology fueling CES and other events. Unlike the rest of the pro-CES, pro-innovation Nevada delegation, Sen. Reid stands alone. The current innovation-throttling legislative fad is focused on "Internet piracy." Majority Leader Reid said he would bring the Protect IP Act (PIPA) to the Senate floor this month despite it being opposed by virtually every innovation and technology company and almost everyone who understands and uses the Internet.

It highlights how out of touch Washington has become with modern communication and use of the Internet. The goal of protecting intellectual property from digital theft is the right one, but the overreaching measure Sen. Reid is pushing swiftly through Congress will chill Internet innovation, economic progress and job growth. It's a product of copyright extremists pouring money -- more than $91 million in 2011, more than they've ever spent before -- into influencing the legislative process.

You would think, at some point, Reid would realize what a mistake he's making. The companies at CES are not "piracy apologists." Most of them have big concerns about counterfeit products and trademark violations. In fact, some of the companies here are among the most aggressive on trademark litigation (something I think many go too far on). And yet... when Senator Wyden and Representative Darrell Issa took the stage on Wednesday to explain why they think PIPA and SOPA are dangerous, they got a standing ovation from the audience.

Supporters still want to believe that the "opposition" to these bills is just Google and some random internet kids. If Harry Reid actually ever bothered to come to one of these events -- where he could see the innovation and the job creation going on, perhaps he'd realize that the concern is real, it's serious, and it's widespread.

Filed Under: copyright, gary shapiro, harry reid, innovation, las vegas, lvrj, pipa, protect ip, sopa
Companies: cea, righthaven, stephens media

How Senator Wyden's PIPA Filibuster Will Work, And What Harry Reid Will Try To Do To Kill It

from the cloture dept

Last month, Senator Harry Reid decided that the massive and growing public outcry against SOPA shouldn't be of any concern at all to the Democratic Party in the Senate, and announced plans to bring the Senate's companion bill, PROTECT IP (or PIPA) to the floor, in an attempt to get around Senator Ron Wyden's hold on the bill (Wyden has been joined by Senators Rand Paul, Jerry Moran and Maria Cantwell, in objecting to the bill and promising to fight against it). As has been noted, Senator Wyden has promised to read aloud the names of those who have signed a petition against the bill.

There has been some confusion over the whole process of the filibuster, as well as the process of the "cloture" vote to both get around the "hold" on the bill, as well as end the filibuster. Some have insisted that Wyden simply won't get to speak on the floor at all if there are the necessary 60 votes for cloture. So, thankfully, Ernesto Falcon at Public Knowledge has put together a fantastic post that explains the hold/cloture/filibuster process and more or less explains what will happen at the end of January if Reid can get the votes to get cloture:

On January 23^rd, the United States Senate will reconvene to begin legislative business for 2012. After the first order of business is taken care of, Majority Leader Harry Reid will then continue the process he started on December 17th of moving PIPA towards a Senate floor vote. This process is known as invoking "cloture," which is a rule that allows any Senator to impose a 30 hour time limit on debate subject to three-fifths of the Senate agreeing to end debate. Senator Ron Wyden has stated he will filibuster PIPA along with Senators Jerry Moran, Maria Cantwell, and Rand Paul and together they will use the full 30 hours available resulting in the cloture vote being held the next day.

On January 24^th, Majority Leader Reid’s cloture motion will have matured its 30 hours and he will then be allowed to call for an up-or-down vote on moving forward to consider PIPA. If three-fifths of the U.S. Senate agree by voting yes on cloture (ending debate), then the bill can be taken up for consideration and the process where Senators can offer amendments will begin as well as another cloture motion (resulting in another 30 hours of debate). The general rule of thumb is a bill that has 60 Senators in support of its passage will take about three days to pass the U.S. Senate.

However, if 60 Senators do not vote yes on cloture, then Senators Wyden, Moran, Cantwell, and Paul will be allowed to continue to speak in opposition to PIPA forever. That being said, what would likely happen in the aftermath if PIPA fails to gain 60 yes votes is the bill is withdrawn and a compromise is negotiated. If no compromise is possible, then the bill officially dies. It is important to note that three-fifths of the Senate must vote yes to move PIPA forward. For example, if 59 Senators voted yes on cloture and 41 Senators voted present or do not vote at all, it fails to pass. The key factor in cloture is three-fifths of the Senate voting yes on cloture and not how many votes are against PIPA.

In other words, as we noted at the time, the race is now on for an additional 20 Senators to sign on with the existing 40 supporters of the bill. If supporters can't find 20 more Senators willing to put their name on the record as supporting PIPA, then the bill likely won't move forward. They already have 40 Senators signed on -- putting their names on a bill that sets up the fundamental legal and technological framework to censor the internet in the US. But, over the last few weeks, this bill has certainly become more toxic as people have spoken out. Unfortunately, it's not toxic enough, and there are plenty of out-of-touch Senators, who don't even realize what's in the bill and what its likely impact will be. That's why there's basically three more weeks in which to make it clear to both supporters of PIPA, as well as those who haven't yet taken a side, that supporting this bill is a huge mistake with serious consequences. If you do have a chance to go to a Town Hall meeting, or otherwise meet your Senator, Public Knowledge has also put together a handy information packet (pdf) with some quick points about the bill, and some sample questions you might want to ask your Senator.

Filed Under: cloture, copyright, filibuster, harry reid, pipa, process, protect ip, ron wyden, senate

Senator Harry Reid Moves To Approve PROTECT IP And Begin Censoring The Internet

from the people-vs.-hollywood dept

Apparently ignoring the widespread protests about both SOPA and PROTECT IP (PIPA) from the last few months (and the momentum growing against both bills), it was announced over the weekend that Harry Reid is seeking to override the hold on PIPA put forth by Senator Ron Wyden (along with Senators Jerry Moran, Maria Cantwell and Rand Paul) by seeking cloture. This isn't a huge surprise. Last week Senator Reid had informed other Democratic Senators that he intended PROTECT IP to be the first bill he brought to the floor when the Senate returns for business in January. So, now the cloture vote will happen January 24th, 2012 just as the Senate comes back into session. That means there's a little over a month where Hollywood is going to make every effort it can to get Senators over to its side. They need 60 Senators to betray the Constitution and to undermine a decade and a half's work on online security for a plan that won't actually help Hollywood at all. But, with Hollywood flinging money around DC like they're making record revenues at the box office (which... um... they are), they've already got 40 Senators signed on. That means there's a month to make sure 20 other Senators don't betray their country, their economy and the internet.

The really disappointing part in all of this is that these Senators appear to remain totally out of touch to the public opinion on these bills. They simply look at Hollywood, the US Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO and see dollar signs. These groups fund campaigns, and 2012 is an election season. So, might as well try to make them happy. Public will be damned. Of course, the one way to defeat dollars is with voters. The more constituents who reach out and call their Senators, or (better yet) go and visit them and explain how this bill is a disaster that undermines everything America stands for, the better. So, start calling...

Filed Under: copyright, free speech, harry reid, pipa, protect ip, senate, sopa

Harry Reid Routes Around Rand Paul; Says No Changes To Patriot Act Is 'An Excellent Compromise'

from the do-we-use-different-dictionaries dept

We've been following the Senate leadership (of both major parties) attempts to push through an extension of some controversial Patriot Act surveillance provisions. As noted, the Senate decided to quickly push the matter towards a vote, cutting off outside debate over the provisions. However, that did still leave room for debate on the floor and the introduction of amendments, and some Senators spoke up -- and spoke up vehemently. Rand Paul had a bunch of amendments and threatened to delay things. He pointed out that Senator Harry Reid lied, after promising to "set aside a week's worth of debate" on the Patriot Act. Meanwhile Senators Ron Wyden, Mark Udall and Jeff Merkley all spoke out against parts of the Patriot Act and these extensions.

And yet... Senator Reid decided to get around all of that, by using a procedural trick to dump the existing bill and instead attach his bill to what appears to be a totally unrelated House business bill:

Sen. Reid basically killed his current bill and and opted to take up a House small business bill (it's in a form that's considered filibuster-proof as far as starting debate goes). Neither Rand Paul nor anyone else can object to this. Reid then amended the House bill with the entire text of the Patriot Act extension.

Of course, where this gets insane is in Senator Reid's explanation for cutting off all of these complaints and amendments:

"We have worked over the last several days to work something out that I think is an excellent compromise," said Reid on the Senate floor. "Is this bill something everyone in the Congress likes? I think the answer is no. But we all agree it's important legislation.

"I have had many conversations with Senator Paul and tried to come up with a process to allow Senator Paul and others to offer amendments. I have been unsuccessful," Reid said.

I think Senator Reid and I have different dictionaries. How is making no changes and simply extending out the existing law for four years, despite such vocal opposition, "an excellent compromise"? What "compromise" did he make, other than to his principles and his oath to serve the people?

Furthermore, if he tried to allow these Senators to offer amendments, how is cutting them off from being able to offer amendments in line with what he claims he tried to do? Rather than cutting them off and using a procedural trick, why didn't he let them offer amendments?

Either way, it sounds like the extension will be somewhat delayed, meaning that the provisions may lapse for a day or two. Some supporters of the extension are suggesting that this is a horrible thing that will put us all in danger, but that's ridiculous. First of all, existing investigations are grandfathered in, and second of all, it's just a few days.

Perhaps the most ridiculous part of all of this is that one of the reasons why they're saying this needs to be rushed through is that the bill itself needs to be flown to Europe so that the President (who is visiting Europe) can sign it. Do they no realize that these things can be done electronically these days?

Filed Under: harry reid, jeff merkley, mark udall, patriot act, rand paul, ron wyden