59 members of the Senate voted in favor of my amendment to block warrantless government (failed by 1

[Celerity]

Fifty-nine members of the Senate just voted in favor of my amendment to block warrantless government surveillance of Americans' browser history. It failed by just one vote. McConnell is that much closer to giving Bill Barr the green light to spy on Americans' private information.

Mitch McConnell is forcing a Senate vote on his amendment to give Bill Barr warrantless access to Americans’ browsing history. I’ve heard a lot of bad ideas in my lifetime, but this is one of the worst.

Link to tweet

These are the Dems who voted against our privacy rights, and for helping give traitor Barr the green light for snooping, SMDH


https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=116&session=2&vote=00089#position

NAYs

Carper (D-DE) <<< too often on the wrong side of these big votes when it deals with banking and the security/surveillance state (he voted to partially roll back Dodd-Frank as well)

Casey (D-PA)

Feinstein (D-CA) <<<<< arfff, and people wonder why I voted for Kevin de León in the primary and the general

Hassan (D-NH) <<< this is a little surprising

Jones (D-AL)

Kaine (D-VA)

Manchin (D-WV) <<< zero shock here

Shaheen (D-NH) <<< this is a little surprising

Warner (D-VA) <<< no shock here

Whitehouse (D-RI) <<< this is surprising


Not Voting

Murray (D-WA) <<< says she would have voted YEA, but she could not get there in time, grrrrrrrrrrrrrr

Sanders (I-VT) <<<< SMDH, inexcusable

[LizBeth]

1. Sanders (I-VT) SMDH, inexcusable

[OAITW r.2.0]

2. Job 1 - Vote Democrats.

Job 2 - Vote better Democrats.

[Cha]

3. KR.. :(

[Rstrstx]

4. Has the House signed off on this?

[Celerity]

5. they have to still vote on the amended bill, they passed the original version 278 - 136

The only Amendment was bipartisan in the Senate, but some in the House are now maybe going to try and add on key protections, plus from the opposite angle, Trump and his shit DOJ Barr Gestapo are whinging on about the one Amendment that did pass. They, of course, want basically zero protections.


https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/house-expected-to-consider-senate-71424/

snip

The Senate also considered several amendments to the bill but only adopted one (S.A. 1584), which was sponsored by Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) to provide more legal protections for some targeted individuals. The proposed amendment includes reforms to the appointment authority regarding individuals to serve as amicus curiae, as well as disclosure requirements for relevant information. In effect, the amendment would bolster the role of outside legal experts in FISC hearings. Separately, an amendment (S.A. 1583) introduced by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) to block warrantless surveillance of web browser search history narrowly failed with 59 of the 60 votes needed for adoption. Sen. Rand Paul's (R-Ky.) amendment (S.A. 1586), which would have established that FISA court provisions cannot be used against U.S. citizens, also failed.

The House is expected to consider the new Senate version of the bill on May 27, 2020, but whether it will pass and head to the president for his signature remains unclear.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) recently told reporters that "[t]he problem is this passed the House overwhelmingly. Sending it back to the House could shut things down, I'm afraid, when it comes to reauthorizing the surveillance programs we need." To that end, some lawmakers including Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) plan to push for additional surveillance restrictions, which have previously failed to attract enough support. The bill also could face opposition from the administration. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a statement expressing appreciation of the Senate's reauthorization of the three expired national security authorities but opposing the amended bill on the grounds that it "would unacceptably degrade our ability to conduct surveillance of terrorists, spies and other national security threats."

[crickets]

6. Interesting. Thanks for the additional info. nt