Posted on 11/17/2005 10:04:35 PM PST by neverdem
WASHINGTON, Nov. 17 - A tentative deal to extend the government's antiterrorism powers under the law known as the USA Patriot Act appeared in some jeopardy Thursday, as Senate Democrats threatened to mount a filibuster in an effort to block the legislation.
"This is worth the fight," Senator Russell D. Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat who serves on the Judiciary Committee, said in an interview.
"I've cleared my schedule right up to Thanksgiving," Mr. Feingold said, adding that he was making plans to read aloud from the Bill of Rights as part of a filibuster if necessary.
The political maneuvering came even before negotiators for the House and Senate had agreed on a final deal to extend the government's counterterrorism powers under the act.
With a tentative deal in place on Wednesday, Congressional negotiators had been expected to reach a final, printed agreement by early Thursday for the full House and Senate to consider. But despite minute-by-minute updates about a possible conclusion, the day passed on with no final agreement, causing no shortage of nervousness among Bush administration officials and Republican supporters of the tentative deal.
By Thursday evening, officials said negotiators had reached what amounted to an impasse for the day, as those from the Senate pushed for further civil rights safeguards that were seen as unacceptable to House leaders. Talks are expected to pick up again on Friday, officials said.
The tentative deal reached by negotiators would make permanent 14 of the 16 provisions of the law that are set to expire at the end of the year. The remaining two provisions - related to government demands for records from businesses and libraries and its use of roving wiretaps - would have to be reconsidered in seven years, as would a separate provision on taking aim at people suspected...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Since when do turds like Fiengold care about The Bill Of Rights?
I'll answer that. Only when they can twist it their own purpose.
They put in this provision to appease the democrats.
And the threat is all it takes to send the GOP alleged-majority to cowering and sucking thumbs.
well, I'm glad my senator has set aside time to finally read the Bill of Rights.....
"he was making plans to read aloud from the Bill of Rights"
That would probably make Russ the only democrat in the senate who has read it.
In a letter Thursday, a bipartisan group of six senators said the tentative deal had caused them "deep concern" because it did not go far enough in "making reasonable changes to the original law to protect innocent people from unnecessary and intrusive government surveillance."I'm calling my critters this morning. Please ping the remaining constitutionalists here.
Reflecting the political breadth of concerns about the law, the letter was signed by three Republicans - Senators Larry E. Craig, John E. Sununu and Lisa Murkowksi - and three Democrats - Senators Richard J. Durbin and Ken Salazar and Mr. Feingold.
The group called for tighter restrictions on the government's ability to demand records and its use of so-called "sneak and peak" warrants to conduct secret searches without immediately informing the target, among other measures.
"We have worked too long and too hard to allow this conference report to eliminate the modest protections for civil liberties that were agreed to unanimously in the Senate," Ms. Murkowski, of Alaska, said in a separate statement.
"There is still time for the conference committee to step back and agree to the Senate's bipartisan approach. If the conference committee doesn't do that, we will fight to stop this bill from becoming law."
A soon as the phones open, I'm on it. Thanks for the info!
Well, got work to do so I voicemailed Nelson and I'll call him back later.
If he reads it during a Filibuster, it will probably be the first time.
Hey, Senator Feingold, start with Amendment 1. Sound familiar?
I didn't think so...
There are already too many laws. They don't just need to stop the bleeding, they need to correct the damage already done.
There's not a one in Washington gives a whooptie-damn about preserving the original Constitutional rights of Americans if it so much as abrades one square inch of their own political skins. In its original context, the Constitution will consistantly chap their hides.
In effect, their view of the Constitution is backwards, the Constitution begins by recognizing the Creator as He who endows or confers rights equally among men and the document of the Constitution is a grant of authority from the people TO THE GOVERNMENT on a specific few of those rights.
IOW, the Constitution does not grant US citizens any rights - not the first. It specifies the areas in which government may infringe upon those that are commonly Divinely endowed.
re: There are already too many laws
How very true! Maybe we need a law that says if hasn't been prosecution under a law in a certain length of time the law is repealed with no further action!
Thanks for the ping .... ATTENTION ALL FREEPERS .... contact your Representatives and Senators... it's that important!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.