Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch paper
Democracy for NH
Granite State Progress
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Pickup Patriots
Re-BlueNH
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Landrigan
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Campaigns, Et Alia.
Jennifer Daler
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC
National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) voted Tuesday night against Senator Reid's motion to block amendments to the Patriot Act extension, voted today against cloture on the bill, and yesterday proposed an amendment to extend the expiring provisions of the law for only 6 months, rather than 4 years, so that there is time for a full debate on any long-term reauthorization. She is a co-sponsor of Senator Leahy's proposed amendment to the bill.
She released the following statement:
"The Patriot Act has proven a useful tool for counter-terrorism efforts that have kept us safe since 9/11. But many in New Hampshire have genuine concerns about what it has cost us in civil liberties. Those concerns should not be taken lightly. Waiting until the last minute to schedule a vote, just as these provisions are about to expire, doesn't allow for a full and thorough debate that would respect the deep importance we assign to personal liberty as Americans.
"While I ultimately support extending the Patriot Act in some form, I know we can make it a better law. A full debate in the Senate, with the chance to consider amendments, would allow us to consider more effective ways to balance our collective security and our individual rights. Surely such a debate is worthy of our time."
The Patriot Act is up for renewal this month. This legislation was initially enacted as a supposedly temporary measure in the wake of 9-11, but portions of it have been made permanent, and the remaining provisions have been extended four times and are set to sunset on May 27th. With the death of Bin Laden, it's time for Congress to re-institute pre-9-11 legal norm, when reverence for civil liberties was a priority for both Americans and their government.
In 1953, Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas wrote, "If the lady from Toledo can be required to disclose what she read yesterday and what she will read tomorrow, fear will take the place of freedom in the libraries, bookstores, and homes of the land."
Yet that's just what a controversial provision from the Bush-era Patriot Act allows the federal government to do.
It's been apparent to me for some time that the war on terror is a smoke screen for the effort to roll back the civil and human rights protections achieved by the American people in the 1960s and "secure" the population from enforcing their own laws.
Something's happened to Dennis Kucinich. There's a newfound confidence; a deeply resigned, yet boldly assertive tone gathering in his voice. I don't know what it is. Maybe it's his recent progress in major polls and grassroots support. Maybe it's the fighter coming out, now that impeachment has gained some life. Maybe it's the realization that a majority of Americans side with him on the issues and that he is the one pushing this party back to the people. Or maybe it's that he's been the candidate who has best exercised the leadership and judgement on huge issues, such as Iraq, the Patriot Act, Iran, Trade, and Impeachment.
It's coming on silly season election time, and John Sununu has decided to use (one of) the current Justice Department scandals to show that, in fact, he's an indypendent kind of Republican (hmm... where have I heard that before?) Discussing the fact that the FBI may have spied on the personal records of as many as 2,000 people without obtaining the legally required national security letters, he said:
"Letters were issued under claims of emergency circumstances when there were none; and letters were issued without proper documentation; and records were retained unnecessarily. When you have a problem of this magnitude, there is obviously a failure at some point in the organization - a failure of supervision, management, and frankly of leadership."
Interesting to hear such tough talk come from a man who championed the appointment of Alberto Gonzales. Because it was Gonzales, you remember, more than anyone else, who joined two words that together are an abomination to the ears of any patriot: America and torture.
