Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

House Limits Patriot Act Rules on Library Records

Posted by samzenpus on from the guess-what-I'm-reading dept.

xerid writes "From CNN.COM: "WASHINGTON (AP) -- The House voted Wednesday to block the FBI and the Justice Department from using the Patriot Act to search library and book store records. Despite a veto threat from President Bush, lawmakers voted 238-187 to block the part of the anti-terrorism law that allows the government to investigate the reading habits of terror suspects.""

6 of 499 comments (clear)

  1. Re:One step forward, two steps back. by crazney · · Score: 3, Informative
    I'm no American, so really I shouldn't care.. but I decided to look into this one. If you follow the links from that URL, you eventually get to remarks on that bill.

    And here are the contents:


    SPEECH OFHON. STENY H. HOYEROF MARYLANDIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESTHURSDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 2005
    Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I am introducing today a joint resolution to repeal outright the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution. The 22nd Amendment requires that no person who has served two terms or has served two years of another President's term be permitted to serve another term of office.
    The time has come to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, and not because of partisan politics. While I am not a
    [Page: E303] GPO's PDF
    supporter of the current President, I feel there are good public policy reasons for a repeal of this amendment. Under the Constitution as altered by the 22nd Amendment, this must be President George W. Bush's last term even if the American people should want him to continue in office. This is an undemocratic result.
    Under the resolution I offer today, President Bush would not be eligible to run for a third term. However, the American people would have restored to themselves and future generations an essential democratic privilege to elect who they choose in the future.
    A limitation on the terms that a President could serve was not fully discussed by the Founding Fathers. However, Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist Paper 72, recognized that one important benefit of not having term limits on the President would be:

    We do not have to rely on rigid constitutional standards to hold our Presidents accountable. Sufficient power resides in the Congress and the Judiciary to protect our country from tyranny. As the noted attorney and counsel to Presidents, Clark Clifford, said:
    I believe we denigrate ourselves as an enlightened people, and our political process as a whole, in imposing on ourselves still further disability to retain tested and trusted leadership. The Congress and the Judiciary are now and will remain free to utilize their own countervailing constitutional power to forestall any executive overreaching.


    It's got nothing to do with Bush. He wouldn't even get to use it. Bloody hell, talk about scaremongering.
    --
    stuff
  2. don't blindly vote your reps out by dangermouse · · Score: 4, Informative
    We really, really need to remove everybody in the House, Senate, and White House immediately, and restore the rights of the people.

    Not everyone. My Representative, John Lewis (Georgia 5th district), has his head screwed on straight. He voted against the PATRIOT Act, and I've been watching him (via his Plogress feed) come down on the right side of every major issue.

    I'm sure there are others like him. Don't throw out any babies with the bath water.

  3. Re:Surely it depends on context by earthbound+kid · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm replying to myself, but here's a good Wiki quote about it:

    "Under PAT 224, several of the surveillance portions (200 level sections) of the PATRIOT Act will expire on December 31, 2005. In a June 9, 2005 speech, President George W. Bush called upon Congress to permanently renew these sections.
    It is important to note that this sunset provision excludes investigations that began before the expiration date. Those investigations may continue with the original PATRIOT Act's full powers."

    So yeah, some stuff expires. But apparently not all of it. It's a damn confusing act. Which is one of it's biggest problems.

  4. The Devil's in the Details by Kainaw · · Score: 3, Informative

    I suspected the article of half-truth when it referred to the USA PATRIOT Act as an "Anti-Terrorism Act". It takes about 2 minutes of reading the USA PATRIOT Act on Wikipedia to realize that terrorism is only a small part of it. So, I went to house.gov and did a little research.

    The bill that it is referring to is:

    An amendment numbered 15 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit funds in the bill from being used to implement provisions of Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act which permits searches of library circulation records, library patron lists, book sales records, or book customer lists under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

    There are some key points to mention here. First, this is limiting a section of FISA, which was absorbed by the USA PATRIOT Act. FISA was passed in 1978. So, all that stuff in the article about the "terrorism bill" being passed in 2001 is garbage. This is referring to a law passed in 1978.

    Second, this isn't ammending FISA or the USA PATRIOT Act. This is ammending a funding bill to ensure that the funds provided by the bill cannot be used by this one section of FISA. So, it is still legal, you just can't use those special funds for it.

    Third, who is paying this writer to write articles designed specifically to fan the anti-patriot act flames? If he had written what the vote was really about, it would have been news. As it is, it is propoganda.

    --
    The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
  5. Re:Danger Will Robinson by Guuge · · Score: 3, Informative

    Republican Representatives vote against Patriot Act.

    Read the vote results.

    To put it simply, 186 Republicans voted in favor of the Patriot Act, with only 38 voting against. 199 Democrats voted against the Patriot Act, with only one in favor. 83% of Republicans voted pro-Patriot Act. 99.5% of Democrats voted anti-patriot act.

    Must reach Slashdot Liberal spinner

    The reason you perceive an anti-Republican sentiment is that most people have correctly concluded that legislation like the Patriot Act is supported strongly and almost exclusively by Republicans.

  6. Re:Voting Record by Guuge · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's all on house.gov.

    Voting record for roll call 258.

    Description of The Sanders Amendment:

    An amendment numbered 15 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit funds in the bill from being used to implement provisions of Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act which permits searches of library circulation records, library patron lists, book sales records, or book customer lists under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).