Putting Dems on the record on terrorist surveillance [Update: FISA bill pulled due to inclusion of commitment to fight al Qaeda

Do you support the hunt for bin laden and the fight against al Qaeda or not?

By Jeff Emanuel Posted in Comments (15) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

[UPDATE by Jeff:] House Democrats were unable to whip enough votes to get their way. Today, they were against a simple vote on a Republican proposal to protect America's intelligence agencies ability to fight Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. That's it - they were against that and fought desperately today to kill it.

When they failed, they pulled the entire FISA bill.

-----------------
[UPDATE by Erick:] House Democrats have fallen into disarray. They are currently holding the FISA legislation from the floor until later in the day, so they can have more time to work their voting numbers. If the vote were held right now, the Republican motion would pass. Dems are working their moderates furiously right now. Just a reminder, the proposal Democrats are working against simply protects the ability of our intelligence agencies to protect America from Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.
----------------------------

On the subject of FISA and terrorist surveillance, Democrats in the House, behind H.R. 3773, are fighting the White House's Protect America Act on several key points, including oversight, types of intelligence that can be collected, and permanence of surveillance authorization. Claiming to be protecting America against purposely nameless and faceless "terrorists" while "also protecting the Constitution" (Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-MD), the ability of the U.S. government - and, specifically, its intelligence community - to gather information and evidence on terrorist organizations and individuals who are actively working against America and her people is something which must be recognized and safeguarded by all branches of government.

To this end, House Republicans are doing what they can procedurally, and, in an effort to get House Democrats on the record against America's terrorist enemies, are today filing a Motion to Recommit on a very brief, specific amendment. The amendment simply says:

Nothing in this Act [H.R. 3773] or the amendments made by this Act shall be construed to prohibit the intelligence community (as defined in section 3(4) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(4))) from conducting surveillance needed to prevent Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, or any other foreign terrorist organization designated under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189) from attacking the United States or any United States person.

Very cut-and-dried, and an opportunity for Democrats who have been calling the War on Terror a war simply against Osama bin Laden a chance to go on the record, before America, and reaffirm their commitment to capturing him and to thwarting (and defeating) his terrorist network.

It's nice to have Republicans in leadership with the cajones to press an issue like this. As Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) put it on his blog, "Later today, on the House floor, let’s put all Members of Congress on the record - which do they care more about, pleasing their MoveOn.org liberal base or making sure America is safe and secure?"

What will the Democrats do?


« Rep. Capuano's Newspeak for CensorshipComments (5) | Mike Pence's Plan to Kill the Fairness DoctrineComments (0) »
Putting Dems on the record on terrorist surveillance [Update: FISA bill pulled due to inclusion of commitment to fight al Qaeda 15 Comments (0 topical, 15 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

I turned on C-SPAN expecting to see some drama. Instead, we're congratulating each other on a railroad safety bill. I'm bored.

And I mean like the 'regular' Rimmer, not *Ace* Rimmer.

They had some success as the entrenched minority. When required to lead, they show only an instinct toward craven power-mongering. And in this case (yet again) Boehner, Blunt and gang have boxed them in.

Good job, boys.

It's war -- so when can we start shooting back at the enemy Democrats?

... Leader Boehner liked it as well!

Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Senior writer for The Hinzsight Report

this.

"Just a reminder, the proposal Democrats are working against simply protects the ability of our intelligence agencies to protect America from Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda."

How could any American justify having voted for such people?

It included a provision that said we would continue to fight AL Quaeda ?

Before any of the rocket scientists on capitol hill decided on this course of action, did any of them check to see if AQ would pull their provisions about fighting us ?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

MOTION TO RECOMMIT WITH INSTRUCTIONS

Mr. Smith of Texas moves to recommit the bill,
H.R. 3773, to the Committee on the Judiciary with instructions
to report the same back to the House promptly
with the following amendment:

At the appropriate place in the bill insert the following
new section:

1 SEC. ll. SURVEILLANCE OF TERRORISTS.
2 Nothing in this Act or the amendments made by this
3 Act shall be construed to prohibit the intelligence commu
4 nity (as defined in section 3(4) of the National Security
5 Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(4))) from conducting surveil
6 lance needed to prevent Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, or
7 any other foreign terrorist organization designated under
8 section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
9 U.S.C. 1189) from attacking the United States or any
10 United States person.

were told Move-on would be very upset with them if they allowed the bill to become law. They just can't afford to make Move-on angry.

Life is not fair, but It's still a Wonderful Life!

According to TPM, the reason Dems are unhappy with the amendment has to do with the motion to recommit "promptly," rather than to recommit "forthwith," as those two have two different effects procedurally.

______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

to a Democrat politician. Can you imagine the shame?

The sad fact is that other than us political junkies, a majority of the American public will not know that the Dems are stalling on the bill because of this amendment, or that it contains absolutely ridiculous restrictions, which will complicate intelligence gathering activities beyond pre 9/11 difficulties, such as the stipulation that a warrant must be obtained before eavesdropping on a call with at least one person outside the U.S., the restrictions it places on soldiers on the battlefield, etc.

The Dems will feed the people their standard line about how they are standing up against the despicable Bush administration that seeks to eavesdrop on everybody with reckless disregard for the law. And Bush will respond by simply urging congress to pass the bill, instead of calling a press conference and explaining every one of the roadblocks the Dems are inserting into the bill, and explain that most of these actually restrict intelligence gathering further than it ever was, and flat out state the the Dems are being facetious in their description of the bill and playing politics. But he won't.

Republicans will get all excited because this "puts the Democrats on record." Some might even blog here at Redstate and tell us how grand this is. The problem is that all they are doing is preaching to the choir. They ought to be hitting the airwaves and print media like crazy in their districts to explain the facts to normal people, who generally only hear one point of view from the media, the left, when they hear anything at all. But again, they won't, they'll just write a little blog here or an oped in the Wall Street Journal or something and pat themselves on the back and think they're accomplishing great things, when in truth they've accomplished nothing other than preaching to the choir. You politicians that occasionally peruse this blog, I hope you read this.

The naive forgive and forget.
The foolish forget but do not forgive.
The wise forgive but do not forget.

We are right on the issue. We have exposed Democrat's rhetoric for the farce it is. But we have no PR element. This goes beyond the MSM supporting the Democrat party line. This goes to a fundamental inability on the part of Congressional Republicans to even attempt to communicate what they are doing and what it means.

Where is the press conference? Where are the ads? Where are out own "lobbying groups" getting out spots in Blue Dog districts telling them what's up with this? Will the White House get involved? Will we hear from administration officials about the amendment and the Democrats unwillingness to allow a vote not only on the motion, but the whole bill?

No. Simple answer - no. We don't even make a decent attempt. Now wonder we get swamped under in the battle of perceptions.

My quick Google shows only one article so far from CBS, in which they blame Republicans for killing the bill:

Aides to Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) notified Republicans Wednesday evening that the bill, which had been scheduled for a vote that afternoon, would not come to the floor after Republicans advertised their intent to offer a motion that would essentially kill it.

...

The problem is that Republicans wrote the motion in such a way that it would kill the overarching bill if Democrats helped them approve it.

From the bits posted here and other things I know, the Republican proposal is the right thing to do. But I don't have time to research the basic facts needed to put together a good letter to the Editor about it. If someone here can give a good bullet point list with references to raw data, I will commit to sending one such letter and posting here after I do. And after the bullet list is posted, I'd like to see other posts indicating where they've sent their letters.

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service