We are being told that the spying on Americans through the Patriot Act is done. . . for now. While the political class in Washington figured they'd be debating on how to overhaul the Patriot Act, they didn't act fast enough so the thing expired. For a moment, folks like Rand Paul, have a victory. The libertarian-minded Republican stood in the way of extending the program as best he could, calling its provisions unconstitutional, and in direct violation of the 4th Amendment.
This is not to say that surveillance programs have stopped altogether, or that the programs in question will not resume. But, for now, the snooping is over.
The whole collection of arguments on both sides definitely carry merit. With an enemy as brutal as Islam out there, pouring across the open border at will, making sure terrorism is not rising within the United States ought to be a priority. But. . . At what point is too much snooping too much snooping? Should it be allowed for the sake of national security? How different is the data collection from the sorting of the mail, and knowing the addresses? Is using algorithms searching for certain phrases or words fine? Or is it just a small opening of Pandora's Box that will allow further intrusion in the future?
This is not to say that surveillance programs have stopped altogether, or that the programs in question will not resume. But, for now, the snooping is over.
The whole collection of arguments on both sides definitely carry merit. With an enemy as brutal as Islam out there, pouring across the open border at will, making sure terrorism is not rising within the United States ought to be a priority. But. . . At what point is too much snooping too much snooping? Should it be allowed for the sake of national security? How different is the data collection from the sorting of the mail, and knowing the addresses? Is using algorithms searching for certain phrases or words fine? Or is it just a small opening of Pandora's Box that will allow further intrusion in the future?
One is reminded of the story of the camel poking his nose through the flap of a tent. How long before that nose comes in a little further, until eventually the whole body is in the tent with you?
We do expect our government to act responsibly with governing this nation, and we expect them to follow the limiting principles offered by the Constitution, but we are also not surprised when the government oversteps its authorities. But, is something like the Patriot Act necessary and proper for the purpose of providing for the common defense against an enemy that knows no rules regarding natural rights, or civilized warfare (as if that's not an oxymoron)?
Regardless, for now, there is no deal, no legislation, and the Patriot Act, or at least portions of it, have expired. The NSA has stopped collecting American phone records. The FBI is not being limited as much as the NSA, but the message is clear, for now, "no more snooping and spying on Americans, for the most part."
The White House, the home of the anti-war president that campaigned on the premise that the wire-tapping by Bush was unconstitutional, no longer seems to feel that way about all of this spying inside our national borders. White House spokesman Josh Earnest said in a statement. "We call on the Senate to ensure this irresponsible lapse in authorities is as short-lived as possible."
President Barack Obama supports the USA Freedom Act, a new idea that would end the NSA's bulk collection of U.S. phone records, but allows the agency to search records held by the phone companies. That bill, which preserves the other expiring provisions, passed the House overwhelmingly May 13. Senate Republicans were not so fast to allow the legislation, blocking it on May 23, arguing that it undercut the NSA's ability to quickly search the records. It fell three votes short of the 60 needed to advance.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell changed his mind as the deadline loomed, embracing the House-passed bill Sunday night.
"It's not ideal but, along with votes on some modest amendments that attempt to ensure the program can actually work as promised, it's now the only realistic way forward," McConnell said.
The Senate then voted 77-17 to achieve cloture, and move ahead on the USA Freedom Act.
However, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul stood in the way, objecting each time McConnell attempted to bring that measure to a vote.
Senator Paul opposed the USA Freedom Act because it still allowed too many allowances for the NSA in their spying on Americans. He argued, "This is what we fought the revolution over, are we going to so blithely give up our freedom? ... I'm not going to take it anymore."
Paul made enemies of a number of Republicans, with Senator John McCain of Arizona proclaiming that Paul places "a higher priority on his fundraising and his ambitions than on the security of the nation."
Paul responded, "People here in town think I'm making a huge mistake. Some of them I think secretly want there to be an attack on the United States so they can blame it on me."
Interestingly enough, a number of Democrats who have been aggressive in criticizing the NSA are backing the USA Freedom Act.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
The White House, the home of the anti-war president that campaigned on the premise that the wire-tapping by Bush was unconstitutional, no longer seems to feel that way about all of this spying inside our national borders. White House spokesman Josh Earnest said in a statement. "We call on the Senate to ensure this irresponsible lapse in authorities is as short-lived as possible."
President Barack Obama supports the USA Freedom Act, a new idea that would end the NSA's bulk collection of U.S. phone records, but allows the agency to search records held by the phone companies. That bill, which preserves the other expiring provisions, passed the House overwhelmingly May 13. Senate Republicans were not so fast to allow the legislation, blocking it on May 23, arguing that it undercut the NSA's ability to quickly search the records. It fell three votes short of the 60 needed to advance.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell changed his mind as the deadline loomed, embracing the House-passed bill Sunday night.
"It's not ideal but, along with votes on some modest amendments that attempt to ensure the program can actually work as promised, it's now the only realistic way forward," McConnell said.
The Senate then voted 77-17 to achieve cloture, and move ahead on the USA Freedom Act.
However, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul stood in the way, objecting each time McConnell attempted to bring that measure to a vote.
Senator Paul opposed the USA Freedom Act because it still allowed too many allowances for the NSA in their spying on Americans. He argued, "This is what we fought the revolution over, are we going to so blithely give up our freedom? ... I'm not going to take it anymore."
Paul made enemies of a number of Republicans, with Senator John McCain of Arizona proclaiming that Paul places "a higher priority on his fundraising and his ambitions than on the security of the nation."
Paul responded, "People here in town think I'm making a huge mistake. Some of them I think secretly want there to be an attack on the United States so they can blame it on me."
Interestingly enough, a number of Democrats who have been aggressive in criticizing the NSA are backing the USA Freedom Act.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
No comments:
Post a Comment