Daily Kos

A Bad Deal - Patriot Act Update

by Senator Russ Feingold

Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 08:54:33 AM PDT

As many of you already know, the White House struck a deal with Republicans on the Patriot Act late yesterday, and it looks like they are on their way to pushing their bad deal through Congress.  Unfortunately, the few minor changes to which the White House agreed simply do not address the major problems with the Act.
As I mentioned earlier this week, I will strongly oppose this one-sided deal, and I will use every option at my disposal to stop it or any reauthorization of the Patriot Act that does not protect the rights and freedoms of law-abiding Americans.  People ask if that means a filibuster -- it sure does.  But, with the Republicans who were on our side and even some Democrats jumping ship, a filibuster will be more difficult.  The other side needs 60 votes to cut off debate, they had 53 in December, so there is a good chance they will now be able to get them.

The White House refused to make some of the reasonable changes that the entire Senate accepted last summer so that it could try to turn this into a partisan issue and gain some political advantage for doing so.  They shouldn't be playing partisan politics and I'm disappointed that some of my Democratic colleagues are ready to fold so easily.  The President's efforts to intimidate our side seem to be working.  

Something everyone can do is contact the Senate Democrats, every single one of them, and explain how this deal doesn't come close to protecting our rights and freedoms.  I understand the pressure that Senators were under -- I've been there before.  But this deal comes nowhere near the significant, although very reasonable, changes in the law for which we were fighting and which every Senator supported earlier last year.  Using this fig leaf of a deal as an excuse to back down is unacceptable.

As Democrats, if we can't stand up for basic values like liberty and freedom, what do we stand for?  We cannot fold in the face of fear and intimidation by the White House.  (Especially if we hope to have any chance of winning future elections.)  Rolling over now is not the answer.

Tags: Russ Feingold, PATRIOT Act (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 194 comments

  •  Keep up the fight! (4.00 / 11)

    Their brazenness never ceases to amaze.

    Visit RemoveRepublicans.com and follow every 2006 Senate race.

    by AnthonySF on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 08:55:15 AM PDT

    •  Capitol Switchboard (4.00 / 7)

      202-224-3121.  They'll connect you with your senator's office.  Call now and call often!

      DONATE! / HillarysVoice

      by Alegre on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:07:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks for your stand, Senator (4.00 / 4)

      We're with you in this fight.

      I personally think that the Senate version of the bill, with a 2 year sunset on the entire bill (not just 2 provisions thereof) is the right solution to demand for. Please consider pushing for it.

      ~~~~~~~~~~~

      Going a step further, if Bush thinks that the constitution allows him to do whatever he wants, in the name of the hyped up "GWOT", then why does he need the PATRIOT act (as was pointed out by Sen. Leahy recently).

      If it doesn't, then he stands in breach of and existing law (FISA), and hence impeachment proceedings against the administration should be launched immediately, instead of rewarding them with continued additional powers.

      Accoding to this logic, which I don't think is frivolous, there is no need for passing any version of PATRIOT act reauthorization. Wouldn't you agree?

      Evan Bayh is a McCain/Lieberman clone.

      by NeuvoLiberal on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:51:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  PATRIOT Act for Dictator Bush? (4.00 / 7)

        Excellent point, why would anyone with any respect for the US Constitution renew this Act that trades away our Bill of Rights?

        And if Bush is just going to spy on whomever he damn well pleases without any pesky warrants- why provide him cover for his illegal acts?

        Thank you Senator Feingold for being the one beacon in a sea of cowardice and self-interest in the US Senate.  Keep fighting to protect our civil rights and preserve our Constitution.

        by MD patriot on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 11:25:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  My sentiments, too, Sir (4.00 / 2)

          Thanks, Senator Feingold, but I think we now have to put all our energy into defeating Republicans (and bad Dems, too). I don't mean give up; surely the full Senate should hear some arguments, but look what happened to near unanimity on banning torture, and that was McCain trying to assert himself, only to find that he had been stabbed in the back by a "signing statement."

          What is going to stop this mad tyrant now are elections and loss of faith in his continual scare tactics. Even the Washington Post pooh-poohed yesterday's flimsy attempt to cry wolf once more, and it isn't working, as the new polls show. We need to keep pounding on the Culture of Corruption, the mess in Iraq, and the incompetence and cronyism. We need to fight back every time he tries fear and intimidation, and preserving our civil liberties should be in the forefront of that argument. But even if you won in the Senate on the Patriot Act, how could you be assured that he wouldn't just append his own interpretation and go blithely ahead, doing what he damn pleases?

          He stuck Social Security privatization into his damned budget, for God's sake. The man cannot take no for an answer. He is stupid, foolish, inept, and stubborn. But he will not be our king. We will get him out of Washington if we have to impeach him and indict all his cronies to do it. First we have to get contol of Congress.

          Thanks for your hard work and dedication.

          "That story is not worth the paper it's rotten on."--Dorothy Parker

          by martyc35 on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 01:36:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Amen to that Neuvo. That should be the very (4.00 / 2)

        argument against it -- Bush: I don't need to ask nobody nutt'n about nutt'n when it comes to the GWOT. That's why that war will never end for this administration and the next one if the Republicans cheat to win again.

        It's a naked power grab at the expense of our personal civil liberties.

        by towit on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 03:47:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Does it sunset? (4.00 / 2)

      Does this version have to be reauthorized after so many years or are with stuck with it?  I agree that we can't roll over when it comes to our liberties.  If we do that, the terrorists win!!

      Winning without Delay.

      by ljm on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:27:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks Feingold.... (none / 0)

      Please keep up the good work, and please do not let Bush get away with illegally wiretapping Americans. If this administration gets away with this program it will be at the expense of this democracy. I hope you urge your collegues to stand up for the laws this country was founded upon. We do not need Dems like Vilsack saying that they are more worried about the public backlash for going after Bush on the wiretaps rather then defending the constitution. If they are so worried about appearances maybe they should check out the latest poll that shows a majority of Americans are worried about our civil liberties being violated.

      Netroots Director for Oregon Senate Candidate Jeff Merkley. Kossacks Donate to Merkley Here!

      by sarahlane on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:06:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Senator, use other procedural tactics (none / 0)

      there are tactics you can use to slow down the senate. object to every unanimous consent agreement from now until the vote on cloture.

      by schwompa on Sat Feb 11, 2006 at 06:33:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Just keep telling the truth, Senator. (4.00 / 6)

        They'll think it's hell.

    CHRISTIAN, n. One who believes that the New Testament is a divinely inspired book admirably suited to the spiritual needs of his neighbor. A. Bierce

    by irate on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 08:57:06 AM PDT

  •  Which Dems are jumping ship? (4.00 / 5)

    It's a neighborly day in this beautywood. Relentless!

    by ablington on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 08:57:53 AM PDT

    •  These ones have been mentioned (4.00 / 3)

      DiFi & Durbin who supported the filibuster in Dec. My suggestion is contact your senator express your feelings.

      by ab initio on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:15:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes Who? (none / 0)

      Perhaps Senator Feingold could post a list here in this diary so we know who to target our calls and emails to?

      Thanks in advance Senator.

      "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

      by talex on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 11:33:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  is this info (none / 0)

      on the senate website?

      -7.63, -5.79 Work like you don't need the money, Love like you've never been hurt, and Dance like nobody's watching.

      by sfluke on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 11:53:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  just found the vote tally (none / 0)

      it's located online here.

      Looks like the final vote was 52-47 in favor of cloture (i.e. ending the filibuster), with Frist joining the nays as a procedural matter.  Otherwise, the only Dems that "jumped ship" were Nelson of Nebraska and Johnson of South Dakota.

      Lieberman, Durbin, and Feinstein all voted to continue the filibuster.  And Chris Dodd was the only Senate member not voting (as I recall he was out of town that day), but one presumes he would ALSO vote to continue the filibuster.

      That means that, with the loss of the 2 Dems, the Democrats still have 42, plus Jeffords who also voted to continue the filibuster, giving them 43 votes.  How strong that is isn't clear, but it does at least give us a better sense of our chances.

      -7.63, -5.79 Work like you don't need the money, Love like you've never been hurt, and Dance like nobody's watching.

      by sfluke on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 12:04:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thank you, Senator (4.00 / 5)

    The Democrats need to use every tool at their disposal to stop the renewal of the act. I think I speak for everyone when I say that we're grateful that you have the courage to stand up and put an end to this.

    "We are the ones we have been waiting for."

    by chicagovigilante on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 08:58:57 AM PDT

  •  I'll Send my senators, Cantwell and Murray a note (none / 0)

    Thanks for the update, senator. I just have one question: what are the provisions that still need revision in your opinion?

    by buffamonk on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:00:34 AM PDT

    •  from the Senators "details" link: (4.00 / 3)


      Fact Sheet From U.S. Senator Russ Feingold
      On How the Patriot Act Deal With the White House
      Falls Short on Protecting Freedoms

      February 10, 2006

      The White House has agreed to only a few minor changes to the Patriot Act conference report -- the same report that could not get through the Senate back in December. These changes do not address the major problems with the Patriot Act that a bipartisan coalition has been trying to fix for the past several years. Senator Feingold strongly opposes this deal, and any reauthorization of the Patriot Act that does not protect the rights and freedoms of law-abiding Americans with no connection to terrorism.

      Critical Areas Where the Deal with the White House Falls Short:

      Section 215 ("Library and Business Records")
      This deal does not prevent the government from obtaining the library, medical and other sensitive business records of people with no link to suspected terrorists.

      Background: The deal struck with the White House leaves this provision unchanged from the conference report that failed to get through the Senate in December. The Senate bill that passed by unanimous consent in July 2005 would have ensured that the government cannot obtain the sensitive, personal records of Americans with no connection whatsoever to a terrorist or spy or their activities. The conference report replaces the Senate test with a low standard - the records just have to be "relevant" to a terrorist investigation, which is not adequate protection against a fishing expedition.

      Gag Orders
      This deal does not provide meaningful judicial review of the gag orders associated with Section 215 business records orders and National Security Letters.

      Background: People who receive demands for documents under the Patriot Act are subject to a "gag order." The deal includes a provision allowing recipients of Section 215 gag orders to challenge those orders in court, but it does not guarantee meaningful judicial review. Under the deal, review of business record orders could only take place after a year has passed and could only be successful if the recipient proves that the government has acted in bad faith. The deal ignores the serious First Amendment problem with the gag rule under current law.

      "Sneak and Peek" Searches
      This deal does not ensure that when government agents secretly break into the homes of Americans to do a so-called "sneak and peek" search, they tell the owners of those homes in most circumstances within seven days, as courts have said they should, and as the Senate bill did.

      Background: This provision remains unchanged from the conference report that failed to get through the Senate in December.

      His site did not come up right away for me, this is the full text from the "details" link in the diary.

      Russ Feingold is the absolute best US Senator- can we clone him?  Or at least clone his spine- spare us some cells please Senator!

      by MD patriot on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 11:31:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Agreed! Details, Please! (none / 1)

    My toadying suckup of a senator, aka Cantwell, will probably vote for the Patriot Act without so much as a second thought, but I hope Patty Murray will join the fray.

    We need details.  If we're gonna gear up again like we did for the Alito nightmare, we need ammo to fight with!

    by Big Eddie Calzone on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:06:44 AM PDT

  •  Thanks, Senator! (4.00 / 5)

    American patriots everywhere applaud your defense of our civil rights and liberties. Could you please lend a little spine or idealism to your Democratic colleagues Harry Reid, Dick Durbin and the like, who seem a little too eager to jump on board with the GOP on the Patriot Act compromise?

    [RED/GLARE]

    For business reasons, I must preserve the outward sign of sanity.

    --Mark Twain

    by redglare on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:08:02 AM PDT

  •  Senator Reid (4.00 / 16)

    Where does he stand?  I was disappointed that he did not take a stronger stand against Alito, he did vote no on cloture, but he didn't lead the Democrats against him.

    Same here, he's not just another Senator, he's the leader and he must lead his caucus against this. Senator Feingold should not need to ask the netroots to do the whipping, Reid (and Durbin) should be doing it.

    John McCain opposed SCHIP

    by Scientician on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:08:28 AM PDT

  •  Thanks, Senator Feingold! (4.00 / 4)

    I'm so grateful we have at least one Senator who understands the magnitude of the threat posed by the Patriot Act and is willing to LEAD.

    I will call every Democratic Senator and ask them to stand with you. I've still got 'em on speed-dial from the Alito vote.

    But can you let us know exactly who we should concentrate on? Not everyone is going to take the time to call the entire list.

    Thank you for leading the fight on this. If it comes to a filibuster, we've got your back.

    The country we carry in our hearts is waiting. -- Bruce Springsteen

    by saucy monkey on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:09:00 AM PDT

  •  Thank you Senator! (4.00 / 3)

    I'll do my part. I've said it before, and I'll say it again; damn I wish you were my senator.

    Feingold for President!

    Someone needs to invent a TV where cable news pundits feel it when you throw your shoe at the screen.

    by poichick on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:10:10 AM PDT

  •  How about refusing "unanimous consent" (4.00 / 11)

    at every step of the Patriot Act reauthorization and, among other things, require the entire text of the Act to be read into the record?  Filibuster by other means if there are too many honest-to-god traitors among the Dems to the extent that it would get authorized as is with their aid.

    Reichstag fire is to Hitler as 9/11 is to Bush

    by praedor on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:13:15 AM PDT

    •  Agreed (4.00 / 2)

      And please tell Senator Kohl that if he has any prayer of getting the support of Wisconsin's progressives in his re-election bid, he'd damn well better back you up on this. As it is right now, I'm shopping around for a candidate I think can take him out in the primary and win the general election.

      Seven score and five years ago... -7.62, -6.36

      by wiscmass on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:17:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What am I, chopped liver? (none / 1)

        Don't answer that...

        This is a test of the Emergency Free Speech System.
        This is only a test.
        If this had been an actual emergency, I'd already be locked up.

        by ben masel on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 11:50:02 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Senator Kohl (none / 0)

        is working very hard on trying to resolve the cluster that is healthcare right now.  Senator Kohl is known and respected in Wisconsin--people are comfortable with him and that is key in a state with quirks across the spectrum.  Everyone knows he cannot be bought.  With every respect for your opinion, I believe in Senator Kohl, and hope that you perhaps try to talk to him, or his staff, before withdrawing your support.

        "If I could have one wish, I would have people accept the importance of our common humanity." --Pres. Bill Clinton, The Today Show, 09/21/06

        by desordre remplir on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 12:00:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Can't Be Bought (none / 0)

          You're right, Kohl can't be bought because he's already got all the money he needs. He's still out of touch with normal Wisconsinites, and seems to do absolutely nothing but sit in the the Senate and vote (inconsistently I might add).

          He's a whole hell of a lot better than any of the Repubs that might replace him, but I'd much rather replace him with a Dem...Masel has my support for now.

          "Murrow had a child. The damn thing went wild." -- Fleetwood Mac
          (-8.63), (-7.03)

          by Perdition on Sat Feb 11, 2006 at 09:26:22 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, but (none / 1)

      not just the text of the Act itself but all the clauses from previous Acts that it amends.  I understand that it is full of multiple referrals to other Acts or statutes to the point of being almost incomprehensible.

      Democrats give you the Bill of Rights; Republicans sell you a bill of goods!

      by barbwires on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:24:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thank You Russ! (none / 0)

    Fighting Bob LaFollette and Paul Wellstone would no doubt be proud that there's still one United States Senator able to live up to the example they set.

    Keep fighting the good fight and making us cheeseheads proud!

    by packerland progressive on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:13:41 AM PDT

  •  Are true filibusters still available (none / 0)

    I see how the Senate talks about 60 votes to end debate on a bill, but is the option of a true filibuster, where a senator refuses to yield the floor and therefore preventing a vote from taking place, still a viable option in today's Senate?

    by Tomtech on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:15:40 AM PDT

    •  I have been wondering the same thing (none / 0)

      From what I have seen on Cspan 2 whenever cloture fails the Senate usually moves on to work on other stuff. I have never seen a classic filibuster where a Senator hogs the Senate floor and speaks for as long as it takes.

      It seems that filibusters nowdays just consist of obtaining 41 votes against cloture to prevent a final vote from occuring.

      I like to drink beer and read blogs.

      by LeftistIndependent on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:16:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Filibuster is debate (none / 0)

      If 60 votes are obtained to stop debate, you have to shut up.

      If not, they generally either keep debating or just drop it for the time being.

      But to answer your question, a passed vote for cloture ends the "endless debate" that comprises a filibuster.

      by homey on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:39:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That IS a filibuster... (none / 0)

      It takes 60 votes to 'call for cloture' which is essentially to end debate, and thus to end the filibuster.

      If one side has 60 votes to end cloture, that stops a filibuster (endless debate) on a topic.  Often, if they cannot get 60 votes, they will simply drop the issue or candidate being voted on.

      So if they have enough for cloture, that's that.

      I'm still an Edwards supporter, and a Patriots fan. Not having the best year here...

      by Stymnus on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:51:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  My former senator, Wayne Morse (none / 0)

        spoke on the Senate floor for 22 hours and 6 minutes, arguing against giving offshore oil drilling rights to the states. He was fiercely independent, going from Republican to Independent to Democrat and winning in each category. I wish he could come back and lend his voice to this struggle. Senator Feingold should not have to fight this battle alone. We need more good fighters who love and cherish our Constitution and fight to protect it. Bless you, Senator Feingold

        "That story is not worth the paper it's rotten on."--Dorothy Parker

        by martyc35 on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 01:55:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Thank You - Senator Feingold (none / 0)

    Is the provision to make demonstrating at select events a felony still in the current Act?

    This is just another attack on our rights.

    No courage = No $$$ for Dems

    by MO Blue on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:16:53 AM PDT

    •  Succinct message (none / 0)

      In another thread, MO Blue gave this great message:  A competent government could provide security and still maintain your Constitutional rights.

      I recommend it to you, Sen. Feingold.  I might tweak it a little, say, A competent government could protect both your family and your Constitutional rights.  But the original is brilliant.

      Liberty and justice for all

      by lovable liberal on Sun Mar 05, 2006 at 01:43:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Can you post exactly the provisions (none / 0)

    that are in the Act that are dangerous.
    I mean the actual words...all of them. I dont feel armed to fight with out exact words that remove our freedoms.

    by snowbird42 on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:21:31 AM PDT

  •  No Democrats should vote for this... (4.00 / 4)

    ...or Republicans either.  Law enforcement had all the tools needed to stop domestic terrorism prior to September 2001.  The USA PATRIOT Act was all about keeping us in a state of fear and giving the government more investigative powers that are not in fact limited to terrorism investigations.

    Now, of course, we know that the Bush administration has always believed the law is irrelevant anyway because the President has limitless powers during wartime.

    "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." Thomas Jefferson

    by rmwarnick on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:22:38 AM PDT

  •  With All Due Respect Senator (none / 0)

    Why should we have to work to get our guys (Dems) to do the right thing? As has been clearly evident from the Alito debacle, despite our efforts our Dems ignored the base. Indeed, it appears we may have actually had more Senators going against us after we phoned and emailed them to filibuster Alito.
    I have very little hope this party at this point will do anything other than provide us with lip service and of course, ask us for money!

    by psalongo on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:23:04 AM PDT

  •  We must remove (4.00 / 2)

    the onerous provisions of this Act or defeat it.

    If this new version contains language which criminalizes dissent at Presidential events, I fear these will become violent when people are arrested.  We do NOT need blood in the streets.

    Pennacchio for Pennsylvania

    by PAprogressive on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:24:13 AM PDT

  •  What the hell is Durbin thinking? (4.00 / 4)

    I hadn't pegged him as a kool-aid drinker.  He surprised me; didn't have him figured as a ship jumper.

    All snark is dedicated to station wagon.

    by Eddie Haskell on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:24:38 AM PDT

  •  With the NSA questions unanswered why is this Bill (4.00 / 6)

    even being considered?  Until Abu Gonzales testifies under oath this Bill should go nowhere.  

    Don't be so afraid of dying that you forget to live.

    by LionelEHutz on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:26:03 AM PDT

    •  Absolutely! (none / 0)

        If ya get lemons...... throw them at somebody you don't like.
         (This comment is late to the party, but in light of this diary
       it's seems to me that the Republicans had better wake up if they think it's not going to be a route this fall.)It seems the American people aren't happy having their freedoms threatened.
         The Patriot Act vote is a big gnarly stick, and dems should use it, not go along with it.
          Filibuster and the threat of it will help with other agenda items. NSA answers are a primary link to the Patriot Act issue.
          Bolton's intercept requests would be a good place to start, as the implication of political surveillance is most obvious right there.
          This fall we need to hang all of these issues around their necks, and we should be linking all these foulups to the Republicans Party In Charge as they are, and this all goes in the election hopper.

          Main theme: The actions by the WH and compliant Congress, with the Republicans in charge, have not answered the very real security needs we really have, and in fact has made it very much worse.
           (If Karl wants to play the politics of fear, well then let's get real about it.)

          * We've fought a needless war when we should have been finishing the one we needed to wage in Afghanistan. Now the Taliban, rich on drug money, is coming back to endanger our ally in Pakistan.  Pakistan, a nuclear power,and being a key country in the 'War on Terror' needs our support, not for us to allow the Taliban to regroup and threaten Pakistan and us.

          *  The time and resources necessary to deal with Iran have been wasted and squandered and has left us with reckless and dangerous choices that endanger millions here and in the Middle East.

          *The lack of options from this has also left Israel in more danger from the reckless mindset already exhibitedby our 'misadventure'in Iraq.

          * Port and border security is incompetant and non-existent. Money has been wasted in Iraq and when spent here has gone to crony campaign donor's companies, looting the American people of the time and treasure we need to be safe.

          * Attacks on our very liberties and freedom of expression at home here have weakened us in all venues of legitimate debate.

          * Our Constitution is the very basis for much of what is good about the US. Our system of checks and balances has been a strength but is now absent.

          * Attacks on and betrayals of senior intelligence and military personnel have decimated a prime asset for our countries safety.

          * Salting of virtually every federal agency with inexperienced cronies and campaign contributors have created a nightmare of bad management and disruption that will last for  generation.

          * Politics of divide and slander have ruined the political discourse necessary for unity in the face of very real threats.

          * Attacks on the social networks and social safety net, aka the New Deal, have distracted and weakened the population at a time when we need to focus on the realities ahead of us as a nation.

          * Specious moral values have led to a symbiosis with criminals who thrive in this chaotic political atmosphere when the checks and balance is inoperastive. This has weakened us by distracting the very people who can be most effective at the War on Terror. This is after all really a law enforcement issue, not a military one, and this misdirection is going to cost us in profound ways.

          * this is just the short list.....

           In short, the incompetance and criminality has made us unsafe in every way you look.

          Senator Feingold, you're doing a great job, and you are inspiring and giving hope to many, thank you.

      by KenBee on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:30:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Keep fighting... (none / 0)

    ...and WIN DAMMIT!

    Thank you for your service to our country Senator.

    by axilla on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:27:55 AM PDT

  •  crap.. (none / 1)

    ...I'm sorry.  Why are they "negotiating" with the president anyway?  The man hasn't vetoed a single thing in his entire presidency.  It doesn't matter what deal "republicans" make (as if they're the only party involved no less) with the WH, the president will just use a signing statement to get the stuff he gave up.

    I think congress is becomming less and less a branch of government and more and more a pretext of the executive branch.  Pretend lawmakers that do the bidding of the president.  And the only ones who have any interest in actual governing gets shut out entirely from the process.

    We need a change.  

    You are entitled to express your opinion. But you are NOT entitled to agreement.

    by DawnG on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:28:50 AM PDT

    •  negotiation with bushCO is another lie (none / 1)

      anything bushco agree to are just one "signing statement" away from nullification.

      Why the Dems continue to "work" with so many blatant criminals as though they're "trustworthy" and "true to their word" is mind-boggling.

      Senator, I love your dedication to us and our country.  I have to say, however, that I am just so disappointed in the other Dems.  I just wrote to Rep. Slaughter on her diary here and asked her to rally the Dems in DC so they can begin to be true to their mascot.  I'm asking the same of you.

      It is time to be the stubborn mules we profess to be and dig in our heels!  If you just took a step back and looked at the catastrophic pace of their disasterous agenda, and where they're trying to take us, surely you could agree that it's time to STOP EVERYTHING!

      There are far too many messes to clean up already.  Why sit back and allow them to make even more?

      The republican MINORITY gridlocked DC when Clinton was in office and they did that just to be brats.  We have genuine reasons for doing so, and the time has come for you and the other Dem "leadership" to lead the way.

      I don't care what you have to do.  Obstruct.  Stall votes.  Filibuster.  Refuse "unanimous consent".  It's obvious it doesn't matter what stance the Dems take, the repubs will smear you on their state-run media...so just freaking do it!

      Maybe such drastic measures would begin to awaken more Americans.....maybe the Democratic message would begin to seep through the stonewall media...

      Come on...please...

      Oh, and a couple other things:  Why does KKKarl Rove still have Security Clearance?

      And...

      FILE ETHICS COMPLAINTS!!!!

      The least the Dems could do is put their complaints into the official record.

      Thanks for all you do.  Too bad we don't have more of you!!!

      GWB + GOP = WMD

      by Shaking the Tree on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:42:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Rove's Street Theatre (4.00 / 4)

    Rove said he was going to use war, war, war to move the agenda.  His little political street theatre this week has done just that.  Let's see, Wednesday night there was a false alarm over a supposed nerve agent that caused the evacuation of a Capitol building.  The Capitol Police said they didn't know what triggered the alarm.  Then Thursday, yesterday   morning, Bush announced with great fanfare a foiled terrorist plot.  On the very day the vote was being held on the Patriot Act. And hearings were being held on NSA spying.  Just a coincidense, I'm sure. But it sure scared the politicians.

    Sen. Feingold, keep up the good work fighting for our rights.  I'm tired of their fear mongering. I doesn't work on me anymore.

    by midwesterner on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:32:34 AM PDT

    •  Quite right, (none / 0)

      we really ought to take Rove at his word.

      Show of hands... who would join Kucinich's effort to impeach VP Cheney?

      by Mogolori on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:27:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Republicans weak on defense (none / 0)

           They have sacrificed much of what made us strong as a nation and must be stopped.
            Go ahead KKKarl, don't throw us in THAT briar patch...please...
            Politics of fear?  The answer: we'd better be afraid of what they've done as the effects of all their malfeasance and incompetance is going to haunt us for generations to come.

        by KenBee on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:34:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Just a coincidence? (none / 0)

      Wednesday night there was a false alarm over a supposed nerve agent that caused the evacuation of a Capitol building.  The Capitol Police said they didn't know what triggered the alarm.  Then Thursday, yesterday   morning, Bush announced with great fanfare a foiled terrorist plot. On the very day the vote was being held on the Patriot Act. And hearings were being held on NSA spying.  Just a coincidense, I'm sure.

      Are you sure?

      I am not sure.  I want to find out for sure.

      Do you remember the bombing in Spain just before elections last year?  (if memory serves me) That was not just a coincidence.

      It sure does seem like, more and more, that elections and votes are coincidentally getting a lot more terrorist activity in their proximity, doesn't it?

      Bypass censorship if you choose to

      by mrcoder on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 07:33:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Terrorism in Senate Building - Just a Coincidence? (none / 1)

      Thanks to midwesterner for sparking this idea for my new diary topic.

      I have made a case in my new diary entry that the recent "false" terrorism in the Senate building, during the same night as the actual vote of the PATRIOT Act no less, was entirely consistent with an intent to tamper with that vote.

      Again, thanks to midwesterner for the idea (which midwesterner actually dismisses).

      Bypass censorship if you choose to

      by mrcoder on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 08:02:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Senator, you said it all (none / 0)

    "The President's efforts to intimidate our side seem to be working."  

    and

    "The White House refused to make some of the reasonable changes that the entire Senate accepted last summer so that it could try to turn this into a partisan issue and gain some political advantage for doing so."

    I am glad we are beginning to see what's going on.

    Keep up the great work.

    by civil society on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:35:06 AM PDT

  •  OKIE DOKIE (none / 0)

    contacted both my senators....

    hope everyone else here is doin the same...

    OIL UBER ALLES says "MORE WARS" McCain

    by KnotIookin on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:36:56 AM PDT

  •  Thank you, Senator Feingold (none / 0)

    I have emailed both Senator Schumer and Senator Clinton of New York and asked them to take a firm stance against the latest White House deal on the reauthorization of the Patriot Act.  I feel my freedoms have been trampled enough by this administration and its constant playing of the fear card.

    quondam quiescence

    by lavaughn on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:40:25 AM PDT

  •  Excellent statement, Senator. Thanks n/t (none / 0)

    Today's Special: Chickenhawk, slow-baked in its mother's basement.

    by Earl on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:40:34 AM PDT

  •  Can't you put a poison pill in it? (none / 1)

    Something to the effect that anyone in the White house who shall be found quilty of revealing classified information, such as outing a CIA officer, shall be held to be a dangerous terrorist sympathiser quilty of Treason, and immediatly interrogated to death?  

    Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Impeach, Incarcerate

    by rktect on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:50:28 AM PDT

    •  With the Republicans in power (none / 0)

      The Dems can't do much but propose such things, which of course the Republicans would stomp out if a 'poison pill' were proposed.

      Hell, the Republicans can REWRITE Democratic proposals, so as to make the Democrats look bad.  Look at what happened to Murtha.

      Right now, at least two branches of government are quite partisan and quite corrupt, arguably the third is leaning that way or is a moot point anyway.

      We need to get some bit of control back or we've lost the country.

      I'm still an Edwards supporter, and a Patriots fan. Not having the best year here...

      by Stymnus on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:55:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What grounds would the Republicans have to oppose (none / 0)

        making the Patriot Act stronger, and acting to prevent intelligence leaks from the White House that might endanger the war effort...

        Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Impeach, Incarcerate

        by rktect on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 11:11:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  We're all getting tired, too. (none / 0)

      That's the shortest post I have ever seen from you, rktect. Don't lose it, now:-).

      "That story is not worth the paper it's rotten on."--Dorothy Parker

      by martyc35 on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 02:03:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Russ... (none / 0)


    I have to ask why you're here. You and John McCain passed the "Campaign Finance Reform Act" - a law that was designed to combat speech during election years. Now supporters of this law are trying to use it against internet blog sites like DailyKos.

    And yet you keep coming back here like you're looking for support - something we can (by extension) argue that you're against.

    So I have to ask why?

    Why I bet you'd stick your head in the fire if I told you you could see Hell. -Otis B. Driftwood

    by Koldun on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:51:40 AM PDT

  •  Please, please... (none / 0)

    Is there anything we can do to help keep the votes less than 60?  

    Who are those ship-jumping Senators?  C'mon...name names.  Is it too late to deluge those Senators w/phone calls?

    "So long as we have enough people in this country willing to fight for their rights, we'll be called a democracy." ~Roger Baldwin

    by spyral on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:57:13 AM PDT

  •  Won't it end the same (none / 0)

    way as the "filibuster"?

    Frankly, I don't have any confidence that the Congress is protecting our liberties any more.  If they were, they wouldn't have passed the Patriot Act in the first place.

    It seems pretty hopeless from here.  I don't think either major party is actually interested in anything but collecting money.

    www.moderaterage.com

    by Turnbow on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:57:29 AM PDT

  •  Now, we need (none / 0)

    50 more like you and the Senate can do its proper job.

    In the meantime, everyone, you read his message.  You know what to do.

    Political Cortex

    by btyarbro on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:58:30 AM PDT

  •  This is excellent but (4.00 / 2)

    we should stop calling it the Patriot act.  It's not an act that patriots should be proud of.  Let's call it instead "The stolen freedom act"

    Now up: Key Senate races: Update with predictions

    by plf515 on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 09:58:43 AM PDT

  •  Called Wyden's office... (none / 0)

    and urged him to support Senator Feingold's position.

    by Alvord on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:00:02 AM PDT

  •  Stand up? (4.00 / 4)

    As Democrats, if we can't stand up for basic values like liberty and freedom, what do we stand for?  We cannot fold in the face of fear and intimidation by the White House.  (Especially if we hope to have any chance of winning future elections.)  Rolling over now is not the answer.

    Why are you asking us, and not your fellow elected so-called "Democrats"...?

    We here in the blogosphere didn't fold as a caucus on Alito, nor on damn near every other substantive issue to come down the pike. Not trying to be rude Senator, I know you are one of the few good guys and do stand for what we (as patriots and as Democrats) also stand for, but we are not the ones who need convincing or failing to heed the call for falling in line, it is your colleagues in the Senate who need to collectively have a "come to Jesus" type moment and begin acting like real Americans and standing up as a caucus for what is correct.

    I back your efforts 100%, and will do what I can to support your efforts on our (all Americans) behalf, but you need to get Reid and the rest of the caucus to collectively pull their heads out of their asses for a change. (to be perfectly blunt)

    cheers,

    Mitch Gore

    Wanna win in '08...?

    Put your money where your mouth is.

    by Lestatdelc on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:11:02 AM PDT

    •  re (none / 0)

      Maybe I am mistaken, but I think that was not a call to DKos users, but rather a subtle jab at his fellow Senators...I am sure he is working them but simply wants our support as well.

      By the way Senator, as a Madison, WI resident, if you decide to run for President, I am willing to ask for a leave of absence from my current job to work on your campaign. I have at least one friend, and maybe more that have indicated the same.

      "Being a Humanist means trying to behave decently without expectation of rewards or punishment after you are dead. - Kurt Vonnegut"

      by jkbiscuit on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 12:13:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  HELP! (4.00 / 2)

    Stop them. If this country fails there will be no heroes on the Hill. Just in the streets.

    Who controls the past, controls the future. Who controls the present, controls the past. George Orwell

    by moon in the house of moe on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:18:29 AM PDT

  •  I have only Republican senators... (none / 0)

    What's the best thing for a regular Jane Q. Voter to do to help?  I mean, calling Sens. Burr and Dole's offices and asking them to side with Sen. Feingold - well, I might as well start bashing my head against the nearest brick wall now.  Do congress members' offices really count calls/emails/letters from people who are not their constituents, or does it just annoy them?  I'm guessing I'd have more traction with someone who clearly has aspirations beyond their own state, but still.

    by Amanda in NC on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:25:09 AM PDT

  •  Bitter for Traitors (4.00 / 4)

    "The Patriot Act."  So that's what they call it.  What's the title supposed to mean?

    Citizens allow government privilege and control of private information and actions?

    It means the government is trying to equate "patriotism" with promoting and allowing government control on the community and personal levels.

    It's another lie.  That has nothing to do with "patriotism."

    Patriotism is just the opposite, in fact.  It's a willingness to take risks on behalf of the rights and freedoms and responsibilities and commitments that all citizens share, and to take those risks voluntarily, freely, without government coercion.

    Patriotism is about people doing what's right for the country, not what the government tells us is right.

    If things like the so-called "Patriot Act" were truly patriotic, then we would still be a British colony.

    But the deception of the "Patriot Act"'s name is indicative of the character of the Bush administration.

    As Patriots, we need to see that we are in a war--not against a small CIA-created foreign party of operatives, but against the terrorists who want to use fear to take away our liberty.

    Once we give it up, we will have to fight to get it back, and there isn't any guarantee we will win--not in our lifetimes.

    Fight terror by casting out fear with love of country, truth, and liberty.  If our government isn't satisfied with that, then they've shown enough about THEIR CHARACTER for us to see that they need to be cast out, too.

    If our leaders can't lead with anything but scare tactics and war, they are very bad leaders and need to be propelled from office immediately.

    We are animated pieces of the earth, the creations of the stars, the waters, and history.  We have nothing to fear.  We have a job to do.

    We are here to preserve and improve conditions for our children and posterity.  The notion that we need to pass "patriot" acts, cut social programs, and drain the treasury to fight "al-Qaeda" is preposterous.  Only brainwashed people could accept such rationale.

    The traitors are those who would sell out the true riches of our country--our values, our community, our land and resources, our system of government--and pervert it into a "fear-based" war and profit-making machine.

    Those leaders need to feel the bitterness of following their flawed ambition.

    Let's rally to crush the Patriot Act.  It's the patriotic thing to do.

    It is better to meet a mother bear robbed of her cubs than to meet a fool busy with a stupid project. -- Pr. 17:12

    by november3rd on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:27:30 AM PDT

    •  Talk about frames--stop calling it Patriot act!!!! (none / 0)

      It's the U.S.A.P.A.T.R.I.O.T. act--the acronym derived from the tortured name "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism"
      It's not about Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism it's about abridging our God-given rights.  

      "The Universe is change; our life is what our thoughts make it." Marcus Aurelius

      by Mosquito Pilot on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 07:59:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Why is this man the only one that gets it? (none / 0)

    "As Democrats, if we can't stand up for basic values like liberty and freedom, what do we stand for?"

    AMEN

    by guyute16 on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:29:00 AM PDT

  •  Dem don't want to talk about national security (4.00 / 2)

    Respectfully Senator Feingold, I would like to point out that on today's Huffington Post Senator Evan Bayh specifically states that some Democrat leadership do not wish to challenge Karl Rove's assertion that they are afraid to talk about national security and that the upcoming election will be fought on the battlefield of who is best equipped to keep America safe.  He says he does not agree and will throw down the gauntlet and challenge this assertion in debates all over the country. He says that some Democrats want to focus on domestic issues such as universal health, education, social security, medicare  etc and leave the national security issue to the Repubs. If true, this is totally insane. As an Independent with social democratic leanings and children and grandchildren, I feel that in the world we live in today this nation requires strong compassionate leadership with intense foreign policy understanding and a sense of history so we do not continue to make the mistakes this administration has made and continues to make.  We cannot live in isolation and this regime continually tries to scare us into thinking that they can guarantee our safety. They cannot, neither can a Democratic administration. Unless we start to look as the world as an interconnected concept we are doomed.  For any Democrat to intimate that national security is not their issue is ludicrous and irrational - you cannot separate national security from domestic economy, and you could certainly start by shining a light on the incompetency of Homeland Security Agency..  You must take the initiative and aggressively challenge the Repubs contention that they are the only ones to be trusted with the terrorist threat, which certainly will not go away any time soon, mostly because of the way they constantly pour gasoline on the flames. Democrats must stop worrying about getting elected and face reality and tell the people the truth. Stand up and kick ass. God knows you have enough incompetency and corruption to make your case. If not now, when?

    by soccergrandmom on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:29:39 AM PDT

  •  According to AG Gonzales (none / 1)

    Bush has whatever authority he deems appropriate to fight the 'War on Terror™'.

    If that's the case there is no need for the USA PATRIOT Act, and certainly no reason to either extend it or revise it, but rather it should be allowed to expire.

    On the other hand, if the AG was wrong then Bush is in deep shit...

    Hope nobody sees me getting freaky...

    by John H on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:37:24 AM PDT

  •  Senator Feingold, (none / 0)

    Thanks for all your hard work on this!

    I was extremely disappointed to see Senator Durbin say that he would support the new changes. I've been contacting him for some time about the PATRIOT Act and asking him to NOT support its renewal. I'll be contacting him AGAIN on a daily basis regarding this with the hope that he will change his mind, even though the likelihood of that is slim.

    Thanks for standing up for our Constitution!!

    Obama, or McCain

    by Elise on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:39:11 AM PDT

  •  Thanks Senator, (none / 0)

    I'll send emails to my Murray and Cantwell today with information from your press release. Thank you

    "Life is a tragedy for those who feel, a comedy for those who think" - Jean de la Bruyere

    by Tinuviel on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:40:59 AM PDT

  •  Where's the actual text? (none / 0)

    Does this "deal" retain Section 602 from the November Conference report?

    This is a test of the Emergency Free Speech System.
    This is only a test.
    If this had been an actual emergency, I'd already be locked up.

    by ben masel on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:42:12 AM PDT

  •  Thank You Senator Feingold (none / 0)

    We are all at stake in their hideous plan, even our Senators, do your colleagues realize that? 230 Years of democracy dying right in front of our eyes, for what, fascism, again, is that what we want we want for our children.  Someone or somebody has to stand up to these criminals or we will pay the price for all their crimes.  We can control this, right now, I am tired of hearing that they have control over the Democrats, stand up against these criminals they have committed numerous amounts of scandals and crimes.  We will have no voice if that Patriot Act is passed.

    We do not have a King for President, he is a dictator and remember Mr. Bush has proudly said it a number of times.

    This administration has its own agenda the PNAC agenda, the New World Order, this should not stand, we want our country back, and we will fight for it.  Hopefully, our Senators feel the same way.

    by alycedouglas on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:46:57 AM PDT

  •  It's like the Alito Vote (none / 0)

    There are times in your life when you are asked and expected to "hold the line."  Our Dem Senators cannot be expected to so.  

    Do you think that after all the effort that was made during the Alito vote that this effort will make any difference at all?  Make all the phone calls you want, it just hurts worse when the turn their backs on you and make you look foolish for trying.

    Screw it.  Not one more phone call.  The Senators know what they are going to do and it makes no difference what we do.

    The Dem Senators that are not begging for support already know how they are going to vote.  It's a done deal.

    by jnmorgan on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 10:56:34 AM PDT

  •  These Two Voters (none / 1)

    As a registered Independent with a spouse who's a registered Democrat, I declare that we will not vote for any candidate who does not come out and announce he or she will vote for the repeal or the so-called Patriot Act.

    There is no proof of its efficacy and multiple proofs of the burdens and abuses it places on citizens.

    Thoughtful and limited legislation that fosters cooperative and legal law enforcement interagency cooperation and intelligence exchange should be enacted in its place.

    They burn our children in their wars and grow rich beyond the dreams of avarice.

    by Limelite on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 11:05:01 AM PDT

  •  Called Reid's office & got right through (none / 0)

    202-224-3121  

    How many aides do these offices typically have on the phone at any given time?  I'm just curious to know the volume it takes to get a busy signal once directed through by the main switchboard.

    For those of you with Republicans as your Senators, call the number above right now and ask for Sen. Reid of Nevada.  Then once connected politely request that he whip the Senate to hold firm on this.  

    Senator Feingold can't tell us to call one particular Senator.  But if not Reid of Nevada, then whom? Is there a more important Senator right now whom we can all feel justified in calling to targeting our efforts?  

    by gspan on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 11:07:10 AM PDT

  •  Dear Senator Feingold, (4.00 / 2)

    I know this may not be appropriate, but, if you get the chance, would you punch Evan Bayh in the nose for me, just as hard as you can?  I mean, really haul off and slug him.  Right in the beak.

    I'm sure we can raise your bail money with a little fundraiser here at Daily Kos.

    I'd do it myself, but I'm not likely to be near him anytime soon.  I'm too busy working and shuffling my daughters to and from their dance classes.

    Thanking you in advance,

    -- Bob Johnson

    by Bob Johnson on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 11:08:29 AM PDT

    •  Ethics (none / 0)

      Ethically speaking, I think he can only do this if you're a resident of Wisconsin, because you're then one of his constituents.

      I'd ask him on your behalf, but I'm a Californian. The best I can hope for is that Barbara Boxer gives him the stink-eye or something.

      Spare the poor people of Crawford, Texas. Send Bush a one-way ticket to the moon instead.

      by JacksonBlogs on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 11:17:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm in Chicago. (none / 0)

        I wonder if I drive north over the border to a Starbuck's or something and repost my note, if that would qualify, even though I couldn't vote for him...

        Any lawyers reading this?

        by Bob Johnson on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 11:21:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Takes 10 days (none / 0)

          to become a Wisconsin resident for voting purposes. You can stay on my couch.

          This is a test of the Emergency Free Speech System.
          This is only a test.
          If this had been an actu