Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

June 11 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew

Close

New on NRO . . .

The Corner

The one and only.

Print   |  Text
 

House Fails to Pass Patriot Act Extensions

BREAKING: In a vote this evening, the House failed to extend key provisions of the Patriot Act. The measure was brought up under suspension, meaning it required a two-thirds majority to pass, but it came up just short, 277 to 148.

The vote breakdown:

Yes — 210 Republicans, 67 Democrats

No — 26 Republicans, 122 Democrats

Here’s the roll.

New on The Corner. . .


COMMENTS   10

EXPAND  

   02/08/11 19:38

Given the current occupant of the Oval office, the House acted wisely.

Enhanced police powers in the hands of Barack Obama are like kerosene grenades in the grip of an arsonist.

GW Bush considered Islamic jihadists to be the enemy.

BO views American conservatives as his foes.

This was a good vote that will avert an abuse of executive authority.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
billy the nillionaire
   02/08/11 21:13

Wow, almost two dozen Republicans voted against the Security Theater State? Guess all that Tea Party rhetoric about freedom is catching on (amongst a tiny minority).

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   JRapp
   02/09/11 08:52

No, it is not a good thing, it is grossly irresponsibility. The PA strikes a reasonable balance between security and privacy. The Dems and those House Republicans have just curtailed our intelligence capabilities and made it more difficult to prevent the next mass terrorist attack. Fighting terrorism is bigger than George Bush, Barack Obama, and whoever else will occupy the Oval Office. The professionals in the FBI and our intelligence services keep watch against terrorism and save American lives every day through their vigilance. Congress just made it more difficult for them to protect American lives and its shameful.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Kevin Moriarty
   02/09/11 09:31

So it begins; the break between the Tea Partiers and the old-line Republicans who bear so much of the blame for the country's current state. I'm impressed that the Tea Party reps stuck to their principles.

Esther, your comment is singularly parochial. You want to start determining executive authority based on the current occupant of the White House? If this Act is truly necessary for U.S. security (which I think is highly debatable), you'd be OK with significant gaps if there happens to be a Democrat (or someone else you differ with on policy or other measures) in the White House? Nonsense.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/09/11 10:09

Given the nature of the State, the House acted wisely.

JRapp demands that Uncle Sam check under his bed for monsters without realizing that by doing so he is creating the next monster to worry about.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
1776
   02/09/11 10:23

I agree with JRapp. Oh billy, since when is 26 "almost two dozen"?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/09/11 10:41

Dick Cheney forget to make some calls?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/09/11 10:46

Will someone please teach Kevin McCarthy to count? He should lose his position over this.

The Republicans shouldn't have brought this up under suspension unless they knew they had the votes. This is pure organizational incompetence.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   JRapp
   02/09/11 11:19

"JRapp demands that Uncle Sam check under his bed for monsters without realizing that by doing so he is creating the next monster to worry about"

No, I demand that the Government gather intelligence on radical Muslims and other terrorists with designs on mass murdering Americans. Contrary to your point, the Jihadists are not motivated by common sense measures such as the Patriot Act.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/09/11 11:44

My point was regarding Uncle Sam, not jihadists. So thank you for illustrating exactly what I was talking about.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact