On Warrantless Wiretapping   5 comments

Over the weekend, President Bush signed into law a bill that effectively removes the judicial oversight functionality of the FISA court, which recently placed limits on the warrantless wiretapping program. Needless to say, the ACLU wasn’t happy. Really.

Congratulations, Congress. You just made it possible for the US Government to eavesdrop on all of my communications for a year on the Attorney General’s sole say-so. You know, the same Alberto Gonzalez who has taken a browbeating in the Senate Judiciary Committee meetings recently for lack of accountability and providing testimony that the committee regarded as being highly suspect… the guy that everyone said ought to resign? You couldn’t make him resign, so you’re going to… grant… him… more responsibility. That’s showing that unitary Executive that Congress is serious about some oversight!

Edited to add: Slate has some scathing commentary. Apparently the “sunset” provision isn’t much of a sunset provision at all:

“The only concession in the new law is the promise that its provisions will sunset in six months, giving Congress an opportunity to work on something even Lieberman might deem “legislative perfection.” In an effort to save face, many Democrats are vowing to fight another day. But if you look closely at the final subsection in the law, it indicates that while the legislation itself will sunset in six months, any programs authorized under the legislation may continue.”

Edited to add (08/08/2007): This post has now replaced my post on Fat16/32 as the most popular post on this blog, a somewhat astounding feat given that the Fat post represents about 60% of the visits to this blog since I launched. Interesting statistic: in the last two days, visitors to this blog have hit click-through links to 14 different GovTrack sites, each of which is a page describing a Senator/Congressperson. Of those 14 click-throughs, 13 of them were viewing a Democrat, and 1 was viewing a Republican. I think the Democratic party may have seriously mismatched the desires of their constituencies, here.

Since mainstream media stories usually lack information about bills passing in Congress, such as the reference number of the bill; and since they also generally only post vote tallies, and not the list of which Senators/Congresspeople actually voted for the bill, here’s a list:

Congresspeople vote on S. 1927:

Alabama

Alaska

  • No Vote Young, Donald [R]

Arizona

Arkansas

California

Colorado

Connecticut

Delaware

Florida

Georgia

Hawaii

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

Iowa

Kansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

New York

North Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

The Senate vote:

Alabama

Aye Sessions, Jefferson [R] Aye Shelby, Richard [R]

Alaska

Aye Murkowski, Lisa [R] Aye Stevens, Ted [R]

Arizona

Aye Kyl, Jon [R] No Vote McCain, John [R]

Arkansas

Aye Lincoln, Blanche [D] Aye Pryor, Mark [D]

California

Aye Feinstein, Dianne [D] No Vote Boxer, Barbara [D]

Colorado

Aye Allard, Wayne [R] Aye Salazar, Ken [D]

Connecticut

Aye Lieberman, Joseph [I] Nay Dodd, Christopher [D]

Delaware

Aye Carper, Thomas [D] Nay Biden, Joseph [D]

Florida

Aye Martinez, Mel [R] Aye Nelson, Bill [D]

Georgia

Aye Chambliss, C. [R] Aye Isakson, John [R]

Hawaii

Aye Inouye, Daniel [D] Nay Akaka, Daniel [D]

Idaho

Aye Craig, Larry [R] Aye Crapo, Michael [R]

Illinois

Nay Durbin, Richard [D] Nay Obama, Barack [D]

Indiana

Aye Bayh, B. [D] No Vote Lugar, Richard [R]

Iowa

Aye Grassley, Charles [R] No Vote Harkin, Thomas [D]

Kansas

Aye Brownback, Samuel [R] Aye Roberts, Pat [R]

Kentucky

Aye McConnell, Mitch [R] No Vote Bunning, Jim [R]

Louisiana

Aye Landrieu, Mary [D] Aye Vitter, David [R]

Maine

Aye Collins, Susan [R] Aye Snowe, Olympia [R]

Maryland

Aye Mikulski, Barbara [D] Nay Cardin, Benjamin [D]

Massachusetts

Nay Kennedy, Edward [D] No Vote Kerry, John [D]

Michigan

Nay Levin, Carl [D] Nay Stabenow, Debbie Ann [D]

Minnesota

Aye Coleman, Norm [R] Aye Klobuchar, Amy [D]

Mississippi

Aye Cochran, Thad [R] No Vote Lott, Trent [R]

Missouri

Aye Bond, Christopher [R] Aye McCaskill, Claire [D]

Montana

Nay Baucus, Max [D] Nay Tester, Jon [D]

Nebraska

Aye Hagel, Charles [R] Aye Nelson, Ben [D]

Nevada

Aye Ensign, John [R] Nay Reid, Harry [D]

New Hampshire

Aye Sununu, John [R] No Vote Gregg, Judd [R]

New Jersey

Nay Lautenberg, Frank [D] Nay Menendez, Robert [D]

New Mexico

Aye Domenici, Pete [R] Nay Bingaman, Jeff [D]

New York

Nay Clinton, Hillary [D] Nay Schumer, Charles [D]

North Carolina

Aye Burr, Richard [R] Aye Dole, Elizabeth [R]

North Dakota

Aye Conrad, Kent [D] No Vote Dorgan, Byron [D]

Ohio

Aye Voinovich, George [R] Nay Brown, Sherrod [D]

Oklahoma

Aye Coburn, Thomas [R] Aye Inhofe, James [R]

Oregon

Aye Smith, Gordon [R] Nay Wyden, Ron [D]

Pennsylvania

Aye Casey, Robert [D] Aye Specter, Arlen [R]

Rhode Island

Nay Reed, John [D] Nay Whitehouse, Sheldon [D]

South Carolina

Aye DeMint, Jim [R] Aye Graham, Lindsey [R]

South Dakota

Aye Thune, John [R] No Vote Johnson, Tim [D]

Tennessee

Aye Corker, Bob [R] No Vote Alexander, Lamar [R]

Texas

Aye Cornyn, John [R] Aye Hutchison, Kay [R]

Utah

Aye Bennett, Robert [R] Aye Hatch, Orrin [R]

Vermont

Nay Leahy, Patrick [D] Nay Sanders, Bernard [I]

Virginia

Aye Warner, John [R] Aye Webb, Jim [D]

Washington

Nay Cantwell, Maria [D] No Vote Murray, Patty [D]

West Virginia

Nay Byrd, Robert [D] Nay Rockefeller, John [D]

Wisconsin

Nay Feingold, Russell [D] Nay Kohl, Herbert [D]

Wyoming

Aye Barrasso, John [R] Aye Enzi, Michael [R]

Advertisements

Posted August 6, 2007 by padraic2112 in news, politics, security

5 responses to “On Warrantless Wiretapping

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. If you love the idea of increased surveillance in U.S. systems (to catch terrorists), you should still want it built so that unauthorized parties cannot use it against you.

    If you hate the idea of increased surveillance (as an invasion of privacy or whatever) then you should be crying out for robust controls in such systems simply as a tactic to slow down or head off their deployment, or at least to reduce the risk if they are deployed.

    Both sides, each for their own reasons, should be calling for congressional review of the system to assure robust control.

    Why hasn’t it happened? Such a technical review could be turned to political advantage for either side.

    The only dumb thing is to ignore the issue.

  2. Pingback: More On Warrentless Wiretapping « Pat’s Daily Grind

  3. Pingback: Why Rudy Giuliani Should Not Be The Next President, Part I « Pat’s Daily Grind

  4. Pingback: Warrantless Wiretapping, Part VI « Pat’s Daily Grind

  5. Pingback: Warrentless Wiretapping, The Irony Edition « Pat’s Daily Grind

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: