Patriot Act renewal
fails in Senate
GOP fights to save
provisions before end-of-year deadline
From CNN on the Web,
December 16, 2005
WASHINGTON -- The Senate on
Friday rejected efforts to renew expiring provisions of the Patriot Act, dealing
a major blow to President Bush and the Republican leadership.
 |
|
|
Sens Ken
Salazar, left, John Sununu, center, and Patrick Leahy talk to the
press after the Patriot Act vote. |
|
Senators on both sides of the aisle
argued that some of the act's provisions infringe on civil rights. The
bipartisan group proposed a three-month extension to continue debate and amend
certain provisions, but the Senate also rejected that proposal Friday.
The Senate needed 60 votes to override a filibuster and end debate, which is
called "invoking cloture." Cloture would have brought the Patriot Act to a
final vote, allowing the Senate to renew it by a simple majority.
But only 52 senators voted to cut off debate; 47 voted against cloture.
The move lays the groundwork for a high-stakes showdown.
Bush has said he would veto a three-month extension, arguing it would be
inadequate. But without an extension, 16 provisions could expire at the
end of the year. There's also the possibility the Senate could still
manage to bring the Patriot Act to a vote before the December 31 deadline.
The Bush administration had lobbied intensely for making the provisions
permanent. Top officials, including Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, had
called lawmakers in hopes of swaying them to the administration's position.
(Read what Bush has to say)
In a statement after the Senate's vote, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said
the provisions "are essential to our efforts in the war on terrorism and their
loss will damage our ability to prevent terrorist attacks. Our nation
cannot afford to let these important counterterrorism tools lapse."
The act, created after the September 11, 2001 attacks, allows the government
broad authority to investigate people suspected of involvement in terrorist
activities. Controversial measures include those allowing the FBI -- with
a court order -- to obtain secret warrants for business, library, medical, and
other records, and to get a wiretap on every phone a suspect uses.
Secret authorization?
As the Senate gathered Friday to debate whether the government had abused its
authority, a major news story played a critical role.
The New York Times reported Friday that Bush, months after the September 11
attacks, "secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on
Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of
terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for
domestic spying, according to government officials."
Sources with knowledge of the program told CNN the report is accurate.
The report was "very, very (problematic), if not devastating" to the renewal
effort, according to Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, who helped negotiate a
compromise with House leaders on extending the provisions.
During Friday's session, senators held up copies of the New York Times report as
a sign that the government could not be trusted with all the broad powers laid
out in the Patriot Act.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York, said he had been unsure the night before how
he would vote. "Today's revelation that the government listened in on
thousands of phone conversations without getting a warrant is shocking and has
greatly influenced my vote," he said. "Today's revelation makes it
very clear that we have to be very careful. Very careful."
Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wisconsin, who voted against the original Patriot Act
but lead efforts to filibuster the current version, said, "I can't imagine a
more shocking example of an abuse of power."
When it comes to discussion of the Patriot Act, Feingold said lawmakers must
"come together" to simultaneously give the government the authority it needs
"and protect the rights and freedoms of innocent citizens."
"We are a democracy -- let's have checks and balances," said Sen. Patrick Leahy,
D-Vermont, in an impassioned speech. "Let us have a government of checks
and balances."
Republicans who voted against cloture included Sens. Chuck Hagel, John Sununu,
Lisa Murkowski, and Larry Craig.
"I urge calm and sensitivity to the fundamental civil liberties of our country,"
said Craig.
Sununu said the government had provided no "substantive" material to show how
proposed changes to some of the provisions could in any way undermine or weaken
the government's ability to fight terrorism.
Kyl: 'No Middle Ground'
But Republican Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona argued that the government has not abused
its powers and that the Patriot Act should be renewed.
"You either vote yes to reauthorize or no not to reauthorize -- there is no
middle ground," he said.
Citing Bush's threat to veto a three-month extension, Kyl added, "If you voted
against cloture you are voting to allow the Patriot Act to expire.".
White House spokesman Scott McClellan, during his daily briefing Friday, was
asked why the administration would oppose an extension.
"We've expressed our views how we believe the provisions should be permanent,"
he said. "And I think what's happening now is that some people are playing
politics with this legislation."
Bush has called the act "essential to fighting the war on terror and preventing
our enemies from striking America again."
Among the staunchest supporters of reauthorizing the provisions was Senate
Majority Leader Bill Frist, who argued that voting against immediate
reauthorization "amounts to defeat and retreat at home."
But due to the complexity of Senate rules, Frist ultimately voted against
cloture. The vote allows him to try to bring the act up for another vote.
This week, the House of Representatives voted 251-174 to renew the 16
provisions, after striking a compromise that altered some of them.
|
