'Was the Democrats' Deception an Admission They've Lost Public Support?'
By Mary Mostert (08/09/07)
On August 3rd, on a vote of 60 yeas to 28 nays, as a last vote before
recessing until September, the Senate passed a Republican "Protect America
Act"(S 1927) and Defeated a Democrat "Protect America Act (S2011) To pass,
either of the bills required 60 votes.
It was then passed by the House on August 4th by a vote of 227 to 183 and
signed by President George W. Bush on August 5th.
In introducing the two bills for debate, Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid,
Democrat of Nevada stated that the Senate would "now proceed to debate
concurrently S. 2011, now at the desk, and S. 1927, as amended with the
changes now at the desk."
Two bills with the same name being debated concurrently? That struck me as a
strange procedure so I read the competing bills and the limited debate that
took place prior to the vote. In effect, S. 2011 would actually "sunset" or
end the ability to collect foreign intelligence about, for example, Al
Qaeda's threatened plans to launch a much larger attack than 911 on the USA
in the near future. In what appeared to me to be an obvious effort by West
Virginia Democrat Sen. John D. Rockefeller, sponsor of S 2011, to deceive
the public and other senators, he claimed HIS bill was the bill the Director
of National Intelligence, former Vice Admiral Mike McConnell, wanted passed!
This effort to deceive members of the Senate was immediately challenged by
Republican Senator Christopher Bond of Missouri who rose and announced: "The
Director of National Intelligence is sitting right off the floor here, and
he has not seen--he has just seen your bill. He does not support it. I ask
if the chairman of the Intel Committee would step outside and talk to the
Director of National Intelligence to see whether, in fact, he does or does
not support the Rockefeller bill or the bill that we introduced on behalf of
the DNI, which is now pending as amendment No. 1927."
With 16 Democrat votes, the bill sponsored by the Republican minority
squeaked through with the 60 needed votes. The current Democrat leadership
and presidential candidates such as Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, Hillery
Clinton, Barack H. Obama, Joe Biden, Robert Byrd, Russ Feingold, Richard
Durbin, Pat Leahy and Carl Levin, voted against S 1927 and for S 2011 which
was actually designed to hamstring Intelligence gathering.
On the following day S 1927 was also briefly discussed and passed in the
House of Representatives. Republican Congressman Lamar Smith of Texas
observed as debate began:
"I support S. 1927, the Protect America Act of 2007. We are a Nation
at war with foreign terrorists who are plotting deadly attacks. Al Qaeda
recently released a video promising a big surprise in the near future.
Yesterday, the Senate passed this national security bill, and the Senate got
it right. It is time for the House to do the same.
"This morning, the President called on the House to pass this
critical bill, stating, ``Protecting America is our most solemn obligation,
and I urge the House to pass this bill without delay.''
"Mr. Speaker, last night we wasted valuable time considering a bill
on the same subject strongly opposed by the Director of National
Intelligence. But that debate did serve a purpose. Now we know where the
majority of the majority stands. Ninety percent of the majority voted to
deny the Director of National Intelligence what he said he needs to prevent
future terrorist attacks.
"The majority claimed that its legislation fixed the problem,
knowing that the Director had publicly opposed the bill because it would not
allow him to carry out his responsibility of protecting the Nation,
especially in our heightened threat environment.
"In the 30 years since Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act, telecommunications technology has dramatically changed. As
a result, the intelligence community is hampered in gathering essential
information about terrorists needed to prevent attacks against America.
Congress must modernize FISA to address this problem.
"The bill, one, clarifies well-established law that neither the
Constitution nor Federal law requires a court order to gather foreign
communications from foreign terrorists; two, adopts flexible procedures to
collect foreign intelligence from foreign terrorists overseas; three,
provides court review of collection procedures for this new authority; and,
four, requires semiannual reports to Congress on the use of this new
authority.
"Unlike the majority's proposal from last night, this bill does not
impose unworkable, bureaucratic requirements that would burden the
intelligence community. Regrettably, the Protect America Act includes a
180-day sunset, but terrorists do not sunset their plots to kill Americans,
so Congress must enact a permanent change in our laws.
"Mr. Speaker, last April, the Director submitted to Congress a
comprehensive proposal to modernize FISA. That proposal already should have
been approved. Congress must enact the Director's proposals from April to
give the intelligence community the additional tools they need to keep our
country safe.
" As we approach the sixth anniversary of the devastating 9/11
attacks, it is critical that we remain vigilant in our war against
terrorism. President George Washington once said: 'There is nothing so
likely to produce peace as to be well prepared to meet the enemy.' Heeding
his words, we must maintain our commitment to winning the war against
terrorism. "
It would appear from the antics of the Democrats in the past few days that
they now know the majority of the American people do not support their
efforts to undermine the war on terror and they have now begun a campaign to
pretend to fight the terrorists while actually doing the exact opposite.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Mary Mostert
