Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Roll Call on Intelligence Bill

Expand Messages
  • westmiller@aol.com
    Final votes yesterday and tonight on the Intelligence Bill. The opponent list looks like an RLC Hall of Fame ... even with the 8 Democrats and several
    Message 1 of 6 , Dec 8, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
          Final votes yesterday and tonight on the "Intelligence" Bill. The
      opponent list looks like an RLC "Hall of Fame" ... even with the 8
      Democrats and several Republicans that thought it wasn't bad -
      or draconian - enough!
       
      Bill
      --------------------------------------
      S 2845 Conference Report
      House  Roll Call # 544: 336 Yes / 75 No
      Senate Roll Call # 216:   89 Yes /  2 No

      ---- HOUSE NOES 75 ---
      Aderholt
      Bachus
      Barrett (SC)
      Bartlett (MD)
      Barton (TX)
      Bishop (UT)
      Blackburn
      Bono
      Boozman
      Brown-Waite, Ginny
      Burgess
      Calvert
      Camp
      Chabot
      Coble
      Collins
      Crane
      Cubin
      Culberson
      Davis, Jo Ann
      Deal (GA)
      Duncan
      Everett
      Feeney
      Flake
      Forbes
      Gallegly
      Gingrey
      Goode
      Gordon [D]
      Green (WI)
      Gutknecht
      Hayworth
      Hefley
      Hostettler
      Issa
      Istook
      Jenkins
      Johnson, Sam
      Jones (NC)
      King (IA)
      Kingston
      Kucinich [D]
      LaHood
      Lewis (KY)
      Lucas (OK)
      Manzullo
      McDermott [D]
      McInnis
      Miller, Gary
      Mollohan [D]
      Murtha [D]
      Myrick
      Neugebauer
      Oberstar
      Obey
      Ose
      Otter
      Paul
      Pitts
      Pombo
      Radanovich
      Rehberg
      Rohrabacher
      Royce
      Sabo [D]
      Sensenbrenner
      Simpson
      Smith (TX)
      Sullivan
      Sweeney
      Tancredo
      Taylor (NC)
      Wamp
      Weldon (FL)
    • F Worley
      From what I ve seen in the media about this bill, it is presented as an absolute no brainer that anyone would be a fool not to vote for. We have to do a
      Message 2 of 6 , Dec 9, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        From what I've seen in the media about this bill, it is presented as an absolute no brainer that anyone would be a fool not to vote for.  We have to do a better job of representing our views and vision in the media.
         
        No, I don't have a solution, but it might be worth a focus group discussion some time, made up of our members etc.
         
        Frank

        westmiller@... wrote:
            Final votes yesterday and tonight on the "Intelligence" Bill. The
        opponent list looks like an RLC "Hall of Fame" ... even with the 8
        Democrats and several Republicans that thought it wasn't bad -
        or draconian - enough!
         
        Bill
        --------------------------------------
        S 2845 Conference Report
        House  Roll Call # 544: 336 Yes / 75 No
        Senate Roll Call # 216:   89 Yes /  2 No

        ---- HOUSE NOES 75 ---
        Aderholt
        Bachus
        Barrett (SC)
        Bartlett (MD)
        Barton (TX)
        Bishop (UT)
        Blackburn
        Bono
        Boozman
        Brown-Waite, Ginny
        Burgess
        Calvert
        Camp
        Chabot
        Coble
        Collins
        Crane
        Cubin
        Culberson
        Davis, Jo Ann
        Deal (GA)
        Duncan
        Everett
        Feeney
        Flake
        Forbes
        Gallegly
        Gingrey
        Goode
        Gordon [D]
        Green (WI)
        Gutknecht
        Hayworth
        Hefley
        Hostettler
        Issa
        Istook
        Jenkins
        Johnson, Sam
        Jones (NC)
        King (IA)
        Kingston
        Kucinich [D]
        LaHood
        Lewis (KY)
        Lucas (OK)
        Manzullo
        McDermott [D]
        McInnis
        Miller, Gary
        Mollohan [D]
        Murtha [D]
        Myrick
        Neugebauer
        Oberstar
        Obey
        Ose
        Otter
        Paul
        Pitts
        Pombo
        Radanovich
        Rehberg
        Rohrabacher
        Royce
        Sabo [D]
        Sensenbrenner
        Simpson
        Smith (TX)
        Sullivan
        Sweeney
        Tancredo
        Taylor (NC)
        Wamp
        Weldon (FL)

      • Dave Nalle
        ... That s not what I m picking up from the media at all. I m getting the clear message that it s a compromise bill that no one is entirely happy with but
        Message 3 of 6 , Dec 9, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          >From what I've seen in the media about this bill, it is presented as
          >an absolute no brainer that anyone would be a fool not to vote for.
          >We have to do a better job of representing our views and vision in
          >the media.

          That's not what I'm picking up from the media at all. I'm getting
          the clear message that it's a compromise bill that no one is entirely
          happy with but which people are going along with reluctantly because
          it's better than nothing and at least satisfies some of the basic
          needs identified by the 9-11 commission.

          Personally, from what I can tell it's fairly meaningless. On the one
          hand it creates the appearance of centralizing administration of
          intelligence, while at the same time merely creating another level of
          ineffective bureaucracy. While I object top any form of government
          growth, it's also usually the case that the more complex and
          redundant the government becomes the less capable it is of actually
          doing anything to oppress us effectively.

          Dave
          --

          -----

          Common Sense for Austin Politics
          www.commonsenseaustin.com
        • westmiller@aol.com
          From: Dave Nalle dave@nalle.net ... Which leaves: oppressing us INeffectively: i.e. on the basis of random bureaucratic whim. The problem (if it s a problem)
          Message 4 of 6 , Dec 9, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            From: Dave Nalle dave@...
            > While I object top any form of government growth,
            > it's also usually the case that the more complex and
            > redundant the government becomes the less capable
            > it is of actually doing anything to oppress us effectively.
                Which leaves: oppressing us INeffectively: i.e. on the
            basis of random bureaucratic whim.
                The problem (if it's a problem) was failure to share
            intelligence among agencies. The obvious solution was
            to eliminate the previous laws that forbade sharing.
                Aside from a new bureaucracy, this bill:
                1. Extended executive discretion to detain and keep
            secret any charges against "lone wolves", rather than
            those associated with "terrorist organizations";
                2. Nationalized the terms and documents for state
            driver's licenses;
                3. Allowed unrestricted cross-referencing of any and
            all state and federal databases for "intelligence" purposes;
                4. Elminated the sunset provisions of the PATRIOT act;
                5. Granted full budget discretion to a Director who is
            not even a member of the cabinet;
                etc., etc.
             
                But, you're right. It was played up as "necessary"
            upgrades of government discretion and snooping, mainly
            promoted by a small group of "9/11 survivors" with a very
            bad agenda.
                However, it wasn't ignored. The RLC joined many other
            organizations (30) in opposing the most onerous provisions
            of the bill. The legislators opposed made their objections
            clear. The fear mongers and "do anything" advocates won.
             
            Bill   
          • Barry Moore
            ...and, since it s probably got some conflicting sections, it will probably be ruled by department regulation in lieu of Congressional mandate. Result? More
            Message 5 of 6 , Dec 9, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              ...and, since it's probably got some conflicting sections, it will probably be "ruled"
              by department regulation in lieu of Congressional mandate. Result? More lawmaking
              by the Executive branch.

              westmiller@... wrote:
              From: Dave Nalle dave@...
              > While I object top any form of government growth,
              > it's also usually the case that the more complex and
              > redundant the government becomes the less capable
              > it is of actually doing anything to oppress us effectively.
                  Which leaves: oppressing us INeffectively: i.e. on the
              basis of random bureaucratic whim.
                  The problem (if it's a problem) was failure to share
              intelligence among agencies. The obvious solution was
              to eliminate the previous laws that forbade sharing.
                  Aside from a new bureaucracy, this bill:
                  1. Extended executive discretion to detain and keep
              secret any charges against "lone wolves", rather than
              those associated with "terrorist organizations";
                  2. Nationalized the terms and documents for state
              driver's licenses;
                  3. Allowed unrestricted cross-referencing of any and
              all state and federal databases for "intelligence" purposes;
                  4. Elminated the sunset provisions of the PATRIOT act;
                  5. Granted full budget discretion to a Director who is
              not even a member of the cabinet;
                  etc., etc.
               
                  But, you're right. It was played up as "necessary"
              upgrades of government discretion and snooping, mainly
              promoted by a small group of "9/11 survivors" with a very
              bad agenda.
                  However, it wasn't ignored. The RLC joined many other
              organizations (30) in opposing the most onerous provisions
              of the bill. The legislators opposed made their objections
              clear. The fear mongers and "do anything" advocates won.
               
              Bill   


              Do you Yahoo!?
              Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.

            • Kevin Boyd
              May God bless each and every one of these heroes. ... The
              Message 6 of 6 , Dec 9, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                May God bless each and every one of these heroes.

                --- In RLC-Action@yahoogroups.com, westmiller@a... wrote:
                > Final votes yesterday and tonight on the "Intelligence" Bill.
                The
                > opponent list looks like an RLC "Hall of Fame" ... even with the 8
                > Democrats and several Republicans that thought it wasn't bad -
                > or draconian - enough!
                >
                > Bill
                > --------------------------------------
                > S 2845 Conference Report
                > House Roll Call # 544: 336 Yes / 75 No
                > Senate Roll Call # 216: 89 Yes / 2 No
                >
                > ---- HOUSE NOES 75 ---
                > Aderholt
                > Bachus
                > Barrett (SC)
                > Bartlett (MD)
                > Barton (TX)
                > Bishop (UT)
                > Blackburn
                > Bono
                > Boozman
                > Brown-Waite, Ginny
                > Burgess
                > Calvert
                > Camp
                > Chabot
                > Coble
                > Collins
                > Crane
                > Cubin
                > Culberson
                > Davis, Jo Ann
                > Deal (GA)
                > Duncan
                > Everett
                > Feeney
                > Flake
                > Forbes
                > Gallegly
                > Gingrey
                > Goode
                > Gordon [D]
                > Green (WI)
                > Gutknecht
                > Hayworth
                > Hefley
                > Hostettler
                > Issa
                > Istook
                > Jenkins
                > Johnson, Sam
                > Jones (NC)
                > King (IA)
                > Kingston
                > Kucinich [D]
                > LaHood
                > Lewis (KY)
                > Lucas (OK)
                > Manzullo
                > McDermott [D]
                > McInnis
                > Miller, Gary
                > Mollohan [D]
                > Murtha [D]
                > Myrick
                > Neugebauer
                > Oberstar
                > Obey
                > Ose
                > Otter
                > Paul
                > Pitts
                > Pombo
                > Radanovich
                > Rehberg
                > Rohrabacher
                > Royce
                > Sabo [D]
                > Sensenbrenner
                > Simpson
                > Smith (TX)
                > Sullivan
                > Sweeney
                > Tancredo
                > Taylor (NC)
                > Wamp
                > Weldon (FL)
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.