
Why Mitch McConnell Cannot Be Allowed to Decide the Fate of the Patriot Act - DiabloD3
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/05/why-mitch-mcconnell-cannot-be-allowed-decide-fate-patriot-act
======
jdp23
The Guardian's live updates have been the best place to follow the maneuvering
today.

[http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2015/may/22/clock-
wi...](http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2015/may/22/clock-winds-down-
on-key-nsa-surveillance-law-as-senate-leader-looks-for-out-live)

The latest updates: there aren't enough votes for McConnell's proposed
reauthorization, but there also aren't quite enough to pass the USA Freedom.
So once cloture fails on USA Freedom, McConnell will propose for a very-short-
term (one or two week) extension, in hopes that everybody wants to go home for
the weekend and so will pass it quickly. If that passes, then the House (which
has already adjourned) could pass it by unanimous consent in a pro forma
session to avoid a sunset, then everybody could start wrangling again when
they come back in early June. Of course the House has vowed not to do that,
but I guess McConnell is hoping they'll be so concerned about a sunset that
they'll back down.

It's like watching sausage getting made ... very very slowly.

~~~
everettForth
Here's a live webcast of the senate floor.
[http://www.senate.gov/floor/](http://www.senate.gov/floor/)

~~~
cosysowen
Anyone got a VLC stream?

~~~
cosysowen
Same as someone linked in a previous thread;
mms://207.7.154.95/G1075_002?wmcache=0

thx linux dude that posted the original!

------
everettForth
The Senate is holding an unusual weekend vote tomorrow to extend section 215
of the Patriot Act 2 more months. If that vote fails, NSA bulk spying on U.S.
citizens is illegal on June 1st.

Here's how senators have voted in the past.
[http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/patriot-act-
reauthor...](http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/patriot-act-
reauthorization-vote-senate-20150522)

~~~
chris_wot
It's already illegal! The NSA reasoning behind their collection is, IMHO, a
legal fiction.

------
themartorana
"Senator McConnell’s bald-faced use of the tragedy of 9/11 as an excuse for
surveillance programs that trample on the Constitution is as repugnant now as
it was then."

I have nothing to add.

------
axaxs
I guess being from Kentucky I have to at least try to explain/justify to
myself how this guy is still in power. I'll start with a short anecdote. I
knew a staffer for a democrat in DC, and he told me very plainly, Mitch
McConnell is the most powerful man in Washington and that Kentucky would be
stupid to lose him. I didn't believe this, and don't want to, but it's
probably not far from the truth.

McConnell has been in DC forever. If there is any justification for term
limits, he is the epitome of it. Kentucky is rather unique, as with many
surrounding states, in that you have a few cities that are relatively current,
tech based, etc. But not 20 minutes away, you have whole slews of folks who've
never used a computer and don't intend to. So, Kentucky is a challenging state
to win.

But to an informed voter, what do you do? On one hand, McConnell is good for
Kentucky and voters know this. He has certain power that is ultimately good
for jobs in this state, and that's what he is elected to do. On the other
hand, he is a terrible decision maker for the nation and for the future in
general.

I didn't vote in his last reelection because I do not support him. But his
opposition was laughably weak, probably because not many think they can beat
him. And they may be right. We need term limits on all politicians to prevent
people like him from existing as they do.

------
MCRed
Whatever happens in the short term the PATRIOT Act can be repealed.

If, that is, we have a congress and presidency that will let it die.

Since 2001- 14 years- we've had both congresses and presidencies that
supported and renewed this piece of legislation. Despite abuses from the
beginning and with the support of people who generally oppose the PATRIOT Act.
(EG: Democrats voting for Obama, Libertarians who voted for Bush the second
time around.)

I think this shows the flaw in the "two party" system.

I would be so much happier if everyone I met who was politically aware and
active was supporting either the green or libertarian parties. The greens and
libertarian presidential debates are already better than the "real" one that's
televised. (The two parties have been having their alternate debates the past
several election cycles.)

But so long as the Republicat Party can count on your support because you're
afraid the Democans will shove Wedge Issue down your throat...well, they have
you under control, don't they?

Even the wedge issues are a joke: B. Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage
Act into law with 3/4 congressional democrat support, H. Clinton opposed gay
marriage until 2013, and personally, I believe Obama is a homophobe and still
opposes it, but says the words that appease the base, and can't actively
undermine it because the tide has turned.

How did the tide turn?

At the state level and in the courts.

~~~
Tloewald
It's quite obvious that the Clintons and Obama are far more liberal than their
policies — far from being a "homophobe" who secretly opposes gay marriage,
Obama is almost certainly guilty merely of underestimating the rate of change
of public opinion on gay rights. Clinton signed DoMA because he had to work
with Gingrich's congress. He also instituted "don't ask don't tell" because
that was as far as he could go at the time.

I have a lot of sympathy for many of the views of the Greens and some of those
of Libertarians, but big parties are, by their nature, "corrupted" by the
reality of assembling a working majority of the electorate and then the
elected and actually having to govern.

