House passes a one-month extension of the Patriot Act

[bishop]

article

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The House passed a one-month extension of the Patriot Act on Thursday and sent it to the Senate for final action as Congress scrambled to prevent expiration of anti-terror law enforcement provisions on December 31. Approval came on a voice vote in a nearly empty chamber, after Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisconsin, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, refused to agree to a six-month extension the Senate cleared several hours earlier. House passage marked the latest step in a stalemate that first pitted Republicans against Democrats in the Senate, then turned into an intramural GOP dispute. It was not clear when the Senate would act on the one-month bill, but approval was possible by evening. Without action by Congress, several provisions enacted in the days following the 2001 terror attacks are due to expire. President Bush has repeatedly called on Congress not to let that happen. The Senate vote Wednesday night marked a turnabout for GOP leaders, who had long insisted they would accept nothing less than a permanent renewal of the law. The House approved the measure earlier this month, but a Democratic-led filibuster blocked passage in the Senate, with critics arguing the bill would shortchange the civil liberties of innocent Americans. Passage of a one-month extension would require lawmakers to debate the issue early in 2006, and is certain to require concessions to the Senate critics who are seeking greater privacy protections. Bush carefully sidestepped the dispute that developed overnight between Republicans in the House and Senate. "It appears to me that Congress understands we've got to keep the Patriot Act in place, that we're still under threat," Bush said before boarding a helicopter for a trip to the presidential retreat at Camp David, Maryland. After weeks of absorbing Republican criticism on the issue, Democrats seized on Sensenbrenner's rejection of a six-month bill. "Congressman Sensenbrenner needs to do what's right for Americans and agree to let the bipartisan Senate bill pass promptly," said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada. Under House rules, Sensenbrenner has the power to block enactment of the six-month law. Officials who described his position did so on condition of anonymity, citing a need to keep the matter confidence. That left the White House and GOP leaders with a dwindling set of options to prevent the expiration of the law. Among them was passage of a short-term extension, possibly one month, a step that would require lawmakers to reconvene earlier than they anticipate in January.

i'm glad to see this happen, especially after the absurd 6-month extension that the senate agreed to..

[Rainbow]

That one month, (it) is the time to re-shape lawmakers stance.
That is the time lawmakers have a chance to modify some of the Patriot Act points.

[Technosoul]

This means it cannot expire while they are debating it. Nice move in favor of the Bush people.

I guess it is wise to sky on potential terrorists even if they are nationals of the USA. Needless to say with all the poor information they get they would also accidently be spying on non-terrorist Americans. If you said anything anit-American on this forum you might get added to the list as a person of interest worthy of such ease dropping. But they say that our national security is as risk if we do not spy on everyone who fits their profile as a terrorest - like what about those dudes who protested at the last Bush election?

Come to think of it child abduction and child abuse is also a big national security problem - our nations children are at risk and the only way to stop those molesters is to put a camera in every room of every house as well as in those offices at the "church", and in child care centers (some of them now have cameras that they put in to prevent false lawsuits). And of course, public restrooms.

What is the balance between privacy and security? They now are using Big Brother technology to raise money with tickets on certain highways, and England uses cameras to collect certain taxes from people who use city streets during the rush hour - the "congestion tax". We all like to have the laws enforced but it is just the idea that the authorites are always watching you and every move you make - peaping Toms never had it so good - it is just creepy. Welcome to 1984.

[Clarence]

Quote by: Technosoul This means it cannot expire while they are debating it. Nice move in favor of the Bush people.

true, but not bad negotiating for the resistance. Hopefully the public doesn't get misinformed the wrong way in the next month. Most of the crap was permanent the first time around anyways. Balance is will shift back to the middle if our congressmen feel supported. I think they have an amplified perspective concerning the citizen's fear of terrorism. They really worry about looking un-american and whatnot. I mean, it's called the Patriot Act. It is an act for some on both sides of the isle. I think Bush got suckerpunched on 9/11 and he's acting like a human man-child would. I want to suggest people keep hope and support the congressman who are defending the constitution.

If you said anything anit-American on this forum you might get added to the list as a person of interest worthy of such ease dropping. But they say that our national security is as risk if we do not spy on everyone who fits their profile as a terrorest - like what about those dudes who protested at the last Bush election?

Very surreal.

Come to think of it child abduction and child abuse is also a big national security problem - our nations children are at risk and the only way to stop those molesters is to put a camera in every room of every house as well as in those offices at the "church", and in child care centers (some of them now have cameras that they put in to prevent false lawsuits). And of course, public restrooms.

as much as you make sense, I refuse to accept this for our future. Whatever that means.

What is the balance between privacy and security? They now are using Big Brother technology to raise money with tickets on certain highways, and England uses cameras to collect certain taxes from people who use city streets during the rush hour - the "congestion tax". We all like to have the laws enforced but it is just the idea that the authorites are always watching you and every move you make - peaping Toms never had it so good - it is just creepy. Welcome to 1984.

There's got to be a way to stop this.

[rmnunez]

What is the balance between privacy and security?

For critical lefties privacy is supreme and security of no concern, for ultra conservatives security is paramount and privacy a lesser matter. For the rest of us the balance is in the middle depending on specific circumstances like our perceptions of risk and our 'monitorable' conduct.

[underbear1]

MAN did Bush get castrated (TWICE) over the Patriot Act today. First the Senate Democrats(and a few moderate Republicans) snip off one , telling him his Patriot Act gets a 6 month patch job. Then Sensenbrenner snips off the other one, with a 5 week Patriot Act extension....OUCH & OUCH!

[oranged]

Quote by: Technosoul This means it cannot expire while they are debating it. Nice move in favor of the Bush people. I guess it is wise to sky on potential terrorists even if they are nationals of the USA. Needless to say with all the poor information they get they would also accidently be spying on non-terrorist Americans. If you said anything anit-American on this forum you might get added to the list as a person of interest worthy of such ease dropping.

Oops! If I am being spied on I haven't noticed. It still wouldn't surprise me all that much.

[Osborn F Enready]

No point in having rights, if they aren't respected.

No chance of security, without oversight.

No reasons valid to violate the Constitution.

I hope it fails absolutely unless they can respect the Constitutional limitations when modifying it.

[jose]

(CBS/AP) The Senate passed a six-month extension of the USA Patriot Act, hoping to avoid the expiration of law enforcement powers deemed vital in the war on terror.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...n1154612.shtml
i´m confused is it one month or six ( or forever)

also it gives the madman time to come up with a ¨reason¨ to justify the next extention