President Barack Obama extended the controversial Patriot Act on Thursday night; a law passed in October 2001 to combat terrorism. Under President George W. Bush, the Act expanded the power of federal law enforcement agencies to use surveillance when trying to monitor terrorist activity.
The Patriot Act has fueled partisan bickering since its initial passing, with Democrats arguing it constricts civil liberties and Republicans defending it as a necessary tool for the war on terror. However, the real story may be how in fighting among Republicans over extending the Patriot Act may be further proof that the party is sputtering toward the 2012 elections.
Tea Party favorite Senator Rand Paul, R-Ky., held the Patriot Act hostage Thursday; threatening to allow key provisions of the Act expire unless a vote was held on his proposed amendments. Initially, Democrats refused to allow a vote on Paul's amendments, but they relented and a vote was held. Both amendments failed, but Paul's goal of debating the Constitutional merits of the Patriot Act was achieved.
One of Paul's amendments would have restricted the federal government's right to access gun records without a warrant, which is currently allowed by the Patriot Act. Senate Republicans seemed hesitant to allow debate on an amendment that would force them to vote between gun rights and fighting the war on terror; two longstanding staples of the Republican platform. Paul reacted by stating:
"I've been working for two long days filibustering the Patriot Act in hopes that we can have a constitutional debate over certain provisions of it and we can try to reform it to take away some of the encroachments on our freedoms. Unfortunately, what we're finding now is that the Democrats have agreed to allow me to have amendments, but my own party is refusing to allow me to debate or present my amendments."
In the face of a dwindling presidential pool, and a crushing defeat in New York's 26th district attributed to 9,495 votes going to Tea Party candidate Jack Davis, rather than Republican Jane Corwin; the party continues its identity crisis. Democrats will keep their eyes peeled to see who steps up to lead a party that currently seems fragmented.
The Patriot Act has fueled partisan bickering since its initial passing, with Democrats arguing it constricts civil liberties and Republicans defending it as a necessary tool for the war on terror. However, the real story may be how in fighting among Republicans over extending the Patriot Act may be further proof that the party is sputtering toward the 2012 elections.
Tea Party favorite Senator Rand Paul, R-Ky., held the Patriot Act hostage Thursday; threatening to allow key provisions of the Act expire unless a vote was held on his proposed amendments. Initially, Democrats refused to allow a vote on Paul's amendments, but they relented and a vote was held. Both amendments failed, but Paul's goal of debating the Constitutional merits of the Patriot Act was achieved.
One of Paul's amendments would have restricted the federal government's right to access gun records without a warrant, which is currently allowed by the Patriot Act. Senate Republicans seemed hesitant to allow debate on an amendment that would force them to vote between gun rights and fighting the war on terror; two longstanding staples of the Republican platform. Paul reacted by stating:
"I've been working for two long days filibustering the Patriot Act in hopes that we can have a constitutional debate over certain provisions of it and we can try to reform it to take away some of the encroachments on our freedoms. Unfortunately, what we're finding now is that the Democrats have agreed to allow me to have amendments, but my own party is refusing to allow me to debate or present my amendments."
In the face of a dwindling presidential pool, and a crushing defeat in New York's 26th district attributed to 9,495 votes going to Tea Party candidate Jack Davis, rather than Republican Jane Corwin; the party continues its identity crisis. Democrats will keep their eyes peeled to see who steps up to lead a party that currently seems fragmented.
Published by Giuseppe Giannet - Featured Contributor in Politics
Giuseppe Giannet is a U.S. history teacher and freelance writer who resides in Upstate New York. Giuseppe's writing offers a unique perspective on the political issues affecting America. He is a Featured C... View profile
War on TerrorAs the "War on Terror" and the Military Industrial Complex consume vital resources, we, as a nation, place ourselves at risk the downfall of our nation and our way of life.- The War on Terror: A Tragedy of Errors - Why It's Time to Cut Our Losses and RunThe so-called "war on terror" cannot be won by sending troops to fight in Iraq. The best way to achieve homeland security is to bring the troops home and begin using our human and financial resources to protect our na...
- Fighting the War on TerrorThe creation of a new combatant command for Africa is a recognition that the war on terror extends beyond Iraq and Afghanistan.
Why We Must Win the War on TerrorWhy this disabled veteran and concerned parent feels we must win the War on Terror.- 24, Fiction and the War On TerrorFighting the War on Terror is all that some presidential candidates have to offer
- Rand Paul to Run for US Senate
- Introducing Rand Paul- Kentucky's Next Senator
- 2009 Memphis Tax Day Tea Party Held in Audobon Park
- The CNN - YouTube Democratic Debate Did Not Ask the Top Voted Question!
- Our Wonderful Bill of Rights: The Ninth and Tenth Amendments
- Bush vs. Iraq: How the war on terror became a war on Iraqi human rights
- President Bush and "The War on Terror"





1 Comments
Post a CommentPoor Paul. Filibustering is harder than it looks, but I'm surprised Obama extended the Patriot Act.