« previous | MUCK HOME | next »

Today's Must Read

The White House surveillance bill squeeze stepped up to another level over the weekend. So the scene is set for an ol' fashioned cloture vote rumble this afternoon at 4:30.

To refresh your memory: the administration's far-reaching surveillance bill, which was passed last August in a similar White House squeeze play, expires February 1st.

To take the time pressure off and ensure that surveillance would be unaffected by the lapse, Senate Majority Leader has repeatedly proposed a 30-day extension to the Protect America Act. Republicans in the Senate have repeatedly blocked any effort to have a vote on it. They've also blocked attempts to hold votes on almost all of the offered amendments, leading to the situation today.

On Thursday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) filed for cloture, forcing a vote which would end debate, preclude any votes on the amendments, and lead immediately to a vote on the underlying Senate bill -- the administration-supported Senate intelligence committee bill, which contains a provision granting retroactive immunity to the telecoms. The Republicans need 60 votes to make that happen.

Now things are at the point where even if the Senate did manage to pass some sort of bill before Thursday, the process of hashing out the differences with the House version (which doesn't contain retroactive immunity) would drag on past the deadline. Reid has said as much: "The president has to make a decision. He's either going to extend the law... or there will be no wiretapping."

And over the weekend, the White House issued a veto threat. The game was clear:

“The president would veto a 30-day extension,” a senior administration official said. “They’re just kicking the can down the road. They need the heat of the current law lapsing to get this done.”

Bush even added a tweak of soft-on-terrorism in his weekly radio address to bring home the message:

"If this law expires, it will become harder to figure out what our enemies are doing to infiltrate our country, harder for us to uncover terrorist plots and harder to prevent attacks on the American people."

For the record, everyone agrees that surveillance initiated under the Protect America Act will be unaffected for another year. But surveillance on new targets would fall under the prior FISA law, the one superseded by the Protect America Act.

So.... what's going to happen this afternoon? The Senate will hold its much anticipated cloture vote, and we'll see if the Republicans will be able to lure over enough Dems over to get to 60. Sens. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Barack Obama (D-IL) will be present to cast their "No" votes. If the vote fails, it seems likely that Reid will try for a vote on that 30-day extension. (For it's part, the House is set to hold a vote on a 30-day extension today.)

As for what happens at that point, I'll be the first to confess that I have no idea. We'll keep you updated.


36 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Between the vote at 4:30 for FISA, Kucinich's attempt to file impeachment articles in the House before the SOTU at around 9 (I think), this could be one of the more interesting days on CSPAN we've ever seen.

user-pic


Any Dem who crosses over should be placed on the do not vote for list.

user-pic

Why is it that Bush can veto bills which don't contain the EXACT PROVISIONS HE DEMANDS and yet its considered a failing of Congress? Did this get reported the same way when Clinton was President? I doubt it.

Let him veto the bill. Then Pelosi and Reid can say he vetoed the same bill he signed 6 months ago and is, in Bush's own words, putting American lives at risk in doing so.

user-pic

"But surveillance on new targets would fall under the prior FISA law, the one superseded by the Protect America Act."

WTF? They didn't follow this law, anyways, when it was the applicable statute. Why the hell does it even matter what law "applies", when Bush has already said he'd do "whatever" to "protect America", implying not following the law?

user-pic

The dems are being played for fools. Play the press game and let the bill expire. The original fisa law was perfectly fine for over 20 years AND, they got the intercepts about 9/11 before the attacks but didn't have enough translators. Kinda sounds like the pearl harbor problem. Let the old fisa bill expire and pass a bill madating the hiring of a couple of hundred arab speaking translators. That would shove it up the king's flag pole hole.

user-pic

Somebody riddle me this:

In the insane scenario that Kucinich holds Bush and Cheney tonight, what happens if the FISA bill as we know it expires on the 1st? There's no way these guys could use signing statements to enact an extension from the friendly confines of the Capitol Basement, is there?

user-pic

Why doesn't Reid grow a pair and just tell them "Fine. Have it your way, but we won't be voting on any more FISA bills at all."

It isn't hard. He has the power, but he and the other chickenheart Democrats refuse to use the power they have. Why? Because they don't really believe in what they're doing, they have no balls and they are not worthy of the offices they hold. Cowards all.

user-pic

This posturing by Bush 2.0 is disgusting... he is truly playing politics with the "war on terror" and he thinks the American public is dumb enough to not see through these kinds of low ball political tactics.

user-pic

Let the "Jack-booted Right to Wire-tap with Immunity" lapse.

Repeal both PATRIOT Acts and the Military Commissions Act.

America is a democratic republic, not a fascist plutocracy.

user-pic

Hi Paul Kiel - what's with all the apostrophes in the possessive "its"? You guys have one of the best investigative/reporting operations going, maybe you should get a proof reader. Sorry to harp but since you are pros now, when one thing like that is wrong, it sheds bad light on the whole.

Remember: like "his," possessive "its" has no apostrophe. Or: unless it means "it is", "its" has no apostrophe.

user-pic

well, if you have "no idea" what will happen you really have not been watching the play the past 7 years or so. The Dems, sadly, will fold like a cheap lawn chair.

user-pic

Let's be clear about one thing here. Obama and Clinton say they want to lead this country. Simply "being there to vote NO" is not enough. They need to lead by ensuring that no immunity is passed in any way, shape or form. If they can't do this, how do they expect to be able to tackle other progressive issues?

Either they start leading on the real issues, or they can get out of the way. We have no use use for supposed leaders that take the safe route while watching others do the heavy lifting.

user-pic

I second the punctuation complaint. Improper apostrophe use is ever-more rampant. At least he didn't use an apostrophe to indicate a PLURAL (or did he?), as in trailer park culture usage.

This is not a small matter. Degradation of language indicates degradation of thought. If you can't punctuate, you can't think.

user-pic

I don't remember the former Dem minority being able to bully the majority like this. How is it that the Republican *minority* is able to sucessfully block the Dems the right to vote on their own amendments?

user-pic

I understand how hard it is to punish a Bush-Dem Senator, particularly one who isn't up for reelection this year. But we must highlight each of them in their home state media, complain to their Democratic State Committees, and contact their offices both in Washington and their home states. Complain, threaten, promise not to contribute to any Democrat in the state in this years elections, and just generally raise hell.

I know it sounds like a lot of work, but these are the weapons a democracy gives to each voter. Use 'em or lose 'em. It's that simple.

user-pic

I think we ought to re-label Bush 2. I'm not certain whether he should be Bush 1.9 or something less, but he's certainly not been worthy of more than that. 1.32 might be appropriate considerings his current ratings.

user-pic

I'm sure that Barack Obama, Professor of Constitutional Law, will, having personally witnessed the destruction of the Constitution under the Bush administration, not merely vote No, but lend his considerable oratorical skills to the Dodd filibuster, thereby showing political courage where it really counts. Not.

I'm not holding my breath.

user-pic

Greenwald as always the go-to guy on all things FISA:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/01/28/bush_fisa/index.html

user-pic

Paul:

Not to pick nits, but FYI:

It's is a contraction. Its is not.

"It's a poor speller indeed who can only come up with a single spelling for a word."

-- Andrew Jackson

user-pic

Re the "it's"s: you fixed one, Paul--one to go! (same paragraph, lower down).

Contrary to the other poster, I don't think failure to punctuate properly indicates failure to think. It just makes you look very slightly shoddy when you're really an ace.

user-pic

Well, I called both my senators to urge them to show some courage and stand up for the rule of law. But their names are Shelby and Sessions, so I think I might as well have phoned for that almost-as-loyal lap dog named Barney and asked him to oppose the President. Really, I think Barney has more cognitive power and capacity for independent thought than either of our two Alabama clowns.

user-pic

"I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing. I have a correspondent whose letters are always a refreshment to me, there is such a breezy unfettered originality about his orthography. He always spells Kow with a large K. Now that is just as good as to spell it with a small one. It is better. It gives the imagination a broader field, a wider scope. It suggests to the mind a grand, vague, impressive new kind of a cow."
- speech at a spelling match, Hartford, Connecticut, May 12, 1875. Reported in the Hartford Courant, May 13, 1875

"Why, there isn't a man who doesn't have to throw out about fifteen hundred words a day when he writes his letters because he can't spell them! It's like trying to do a St. Vitus dance with wooden legs."
- The Alphabet and Simplified Spelling speech, December 9, 1907

"I have had an aversion to good spelling for sixty years and more, merely for the reason that when I was a boy there was not a thing I could do creditably except spell according to the book. It was a poor and mean distinction and I early learned to disenjoy it. I suppose that this is because the ability to spell correctly is a talent, not an acquirement. There is some dignity about an acquirement, because it is a product of your own labor. It is wages earned, whereas to be able to do a thing merely by the grace of God and not by your own effort transfers the distinction to our heavenly home--where possibly it is a matter of pride and satisfaction but it leaves you naked and bankrupt."
- Mark Twain's Autobiography

user-pic

Should Pennsylvania Senate/House members vote for cloture or immunity I will vote for any democrat that opposes them in the next election.

user-pic

re: Bush Revisionist

I thought we were still operating under Bush Beta!

user-pic

Glaringly missing from all the debate are disclosures about the illegal eavesdropping.

Why are we told laws were broken, yet we lack the details?

Worse still, are lawmakers asked to pass laws without now the truth too?

All this has the hallmarks of one branch of government being a junta, unresponsive to its Constitutional duties and responsibilities.

user-pic

Through all of this, what drives me most crazy is that nowadays the following sounds like an identifiable threat:

"... or there will be no wiretapping."

We're at the point now where wiretapping is so valuable and accepted that it's worth extorting someone's agreement in exchange for. Geesh.

user-pic


Remember : the ONLY reason for wiretaps is to eavesdrop on political opponents.

Sure, for the first five minutes, they say they want to listen in on 'terrorists'. Then they tune in to political opponents.

Let's not be naive, colleagues.

user-pic

Listen up for the Blu Dog Dems. They will be howlin with W.

user-pic

Watching CSPAN2 and McConnell(R-KY) is talking and basically saying Bush's point's re 'stimulus bill' and 'FISA'; these guy is such a fact falsifier it's ludicrous.
BUT why is the media -including tpm- ignoring this:
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5583

This shows how corrupt and ethically challenged- besides being treasonous- those elected have become.

user-pic

Hatch(R-Utah) just said that the Judicary bill is what the American public wants and needs; huh?

user-pic

Spector(R-PA)is objecting to cloture vote as such would make his and Whitehouse(d-NY) amendment not 'germane'(it basically substitutes the gummint for the telecom's and strips gummint immunity is such cases.)
He's pissed big time that the amendment was ruled 'germane'.

user-pic

Peep wrote on January 28, 2008 10:06 AM:

Any Dem who crosses over should be placed on the do not vote for list.

DEAR PEEP:
Every single one of them should be
run out of office on a rail.
We need to stop rewarding these
people for screwing us over.

user-pic

Cornyn(r-TX) just impaled himself on his own petard by pointing to the Pelosi/Boehner/Bush stimulus agreement as an example of 'bi-partisanship- seemingly not recognizing that the House FISA update included NO IMMUNITY for the telecom's; wonder if anyone will call him on it.

user-pic

cloture on s2248 defeated with Nelson(d-NE),Lincoln,Pryor,and Landrieu(all dems) again voting with teh Repubs; someone correct me but I'd swear that Landrieu initially voted against cloture then changed her mind.
Defeated 48-45 and Clinton and Obama voted no; so what happened to the other folks who were there last week?

user-pic

Freda, John H. Farr, and Bobby Spellchecker: And I thought I was the only grammar cop on the beat around here. Nice to know there is a whole squad!

And Walrus: I agree with you. The GOP had 40 years to learn how to play as the minority party, and they have perfected the art. I hope the Dems are taking notes so that the next time they find themselves in that position (and there will certainly be a next time at some point), they'll know how the game is supposed to be played.

But at the same time, Democrats need to be making more noise about what the Republicans are doing to make it clear who it is that is gumming up the legislative works. Republicans should be made to pay a price for it at the polls -- that's the other lesson the Dems need to learn from the GOP. They sure screamed "obstructionist" loud enough whenever the Dems even thought about filibustering bills.

user-pic

>> Cornyn(r-TX) just impaled himself on his own petard by pointing to the Pelosi/Boehner/Bush stimulus agreement as an example of 'bi-partisanship- seemingly not recognizing that the House FISA update included NO IMMUNITY for the telecom's; wonder if anyone will call him on it. <<

Republican definition of "bi-partisanship": Democrats give in to everything the Republicans want.

And you are correct about Landrieu: she initially voted against cloture, and then switched her vote when it was clear that the Repugs didn't have 60 votes.

Leave a comment

Tag Cloud

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address