Enter your email address to subscribe to Irregular Times and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 311 other subscribers

Irregular Times Newsletters

Click here to subscribe to any or all of our six topical e-mail newsletters:
  1. Social Movement Actions,
  2. Credulity and Faith,
  3. Election News,
  4. This Week in Congress,
  5. Tech Dispatch and
  6. our latest Political Stickers and Such

Contact Us

We can be contacted via retorts@irregulartimes.com

Surprise: Cosponsors of Anti-Surveillance Civil Liberty Bill are 86% Republican

Time was, when you wanted to protect constitutional rights against unwarranted surveillance, search and seizure in America, you would look to Democrats in Congress. Sure, some conservative Blue Dog Democrats would vote to give the government Big Brother powers, but most Democrats weren’t like that. A majority of Democrats in the House voted against the FISA Amendments Act, and in fact 99.2% of the opponents of the FISA Amendments Act in that vote were Democrats.

But flash forward to this year. H.R. 637, the Preserving American Privacy Act, is a bill that would require the government to obtain a warrant before using drones to track people in private areas, and further require the government to notify the public when it is tracking people in public areas. Sounds downright ACLUish, doesn’t it? Well, guess what: Representative Zoe Lofgren is a cosponsor of that bill. She’s a Democrat. And she’s the only Democrat who has come out in support of the bill.

There are seven supporters of the Preserving American Privacy Act. Six of them, including Republican Representative Ted Poe, are Republicans. On February 13 2013, preparing to introduce his legislation, Ted Poe spoke on the floor of the House:

"Mr. Speaker, the domestic use of drones is on the way. There will be more eyes in the sky looking over America.

According to the FAA, by 2015, it will allow the use of drones nationwide, and by 2030, 30,000 drones will be cruising American skies--looking, observing, filming, and hovering over America. They will come whether we like it or not. We will not know where they are or what they're looking at or what their purpose is, whether it's permitted or not permitted, whether it's lawful or unlawful, and we really won't know who is flying those drones.

Sometimes drones are good. We can thank drones for helping us track terrorists overseas and for helping us catch outlaws on the border. Legitimate uses by government and private citizens do occur, but a nosy neighbor or a Big Brother government does not have the right to look into a window without legitimate cause or, in the case of government, probable cause."

Time was, a Democrat would have said that. Now it’s a Republican talking about Americans’ rights.

That’s not fair, you’re thinking. There’s another bill against drone surveillance before the Congress, an alternative, you’re saying to yourself. I should link to that one, you’re thinking.

That’s right. There is one other bill before the Congress about drones. It’s H.R. 972, the Preserving Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act. It’s been introduced by Austin Scott — a Georgia Republican.

5 comments to Surprise: Cosponsors of Anti-Surveillance Civil Liberty Bill are 86% Republican

  • Dave

    Until about 1970 there were liberals and conservatives in BOTH parties and often one’s allies were found across the aisle. It made politics interesting, as few new for sure how any vote would come down. Unbelievable dealmaking. Party conventions full of drama. Full democracy of a free republic in action. Lotsa fun. Even Dwight Eisenhower was approached by both Dems and Repubs as a possible candidate in 1952.

    The Goldwater Republican movement of 1962-4 and the corresponding leftist takeover of the Dem Party in 1970-2 (and consequential exodus of conservatives from the Party 1972-80) have really given us dull and predictable stuff, not at all conducive to getting things done. I’d love to mix it up again, but entire generations have been raised on acrimonious politics since those days and probably believe that it’s the only way. Sigh.

  • Tom

    Politics as a means to progressive, positive or practical legislation that benefits the masses is no longer viable due to corporate corruption at every level including the courts. Now even our watchdog agencies are part of the corporate domain and no longer protect us from GMO foods, poisons in our drinking water and in the air we breathe, and an overreaching president and his goon squad of DHS morons backed with drones busily establishing a police state. Soon it will become all too apparent that climate change is killing all the vegetation and that there isn’t enough food to feed us all, then they’ll leap into action by executive order taking over everything an assigning us all to a local gulag for “processing.” There’s not going to be any revolution unless and until it’s too late, then it’s basically suicide. So much for America (and most of the rest of the world).

    • Dave

      Tom, they are not invincible, nor is their agenda inevitable. However, they do want you to believe otherwise. What are you believing?

  • Tom

    Got Milk?

    Reporters Fired For Exposing U.S. Milk Contamination & Monsanto

  • Tom

    If you want to know just how bad it really is, watch this:

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>