Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Dems cave again: Senate approves intelligence bill

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
jmp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-03-07 01:52 PM
Original message
Dems cave again: Senate approves intelligence bill
Senate approves intelligence bill

By PAMELA HESS, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The Senate has scrapped its bid to obtain the archive of daily intelligence briefings given to the president on Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion.

That request was among several controversial provisions dropped from an intelligence bill, leading to the measure's unanimous Senate passage Wednesday.

The provision sought to give the Senate and House intelligence committees access to all presidential daily briefs between 1997 and 2003 that referred to Iraq — an attempt to determine whether the White House mischaracterized intelligence prior to the war. Senate Republicans objected, saying the documents had already been reviewed by an independent commission, according to a congressional official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.

The final version of the bill also dropped a requirement that the director of national intelligence conduct an assessment of the effects of global climate change on national security.

The overall legislation would give Congress' approval for the whole range of intelligence programs over the coming year, including spy satellites and eavesdropping, human spying and battlefield collection, along with recommended spending levels. Most of the bill is secret.

The House approved its own version of the bill in May, and the two chambers now must work out differences between the two versions.

The Senate bill also gives new power to the inspector general in the office of the director of national intelligence to conduct investigations into Pentagon programs, which consume about 80 percent of the nation's intelligence budget.

The bill also requires the director of national intelligence to alert Congress when the cost of any major intelligence acquisition program grows by 20 percent or more. If it increases by as much as 40 percent, the president has to certify the program is necessary to national security and that there are no viable alternatives. Similar requirements already apply to major defense acquisition programs.

A top intelligence official disclosed in 2005 that the annual budget was around $44 billion. Experts estimate the budget is usually about 10 percent of total defense spending.

Link to the story



We should have a "daily cave" feature on this forum.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-03-07 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
1. more good news to flag our pathway
into a fascist police state.

thought I couldn't get more depressed about our country and it's stupid leadership. I was wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-03-07 02:16 PM
Response to Original message
2. Dems vote for Reid-Feingold 27-21, yet somehow its "Dems cave"?
Twenty-seven Democrats supported Reid-Feingold and 21 opposed. In contrast, on the repub side, zero supported Reid Feingold and 46 opposed (this takes into account no-shows by some members).

Yet, its "the Dems" that caved, rather than individual Dems. I don't get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-03-07 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Well, there are those 21 Dems who voted with the Republicans... (NT)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-03-07 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. yes there are.
But too many DUers seem to bash all Dems when a vote fails, even when a majority of Dems support the action. Blaming the party for the actions of a minority of its members strikes me as passing strange.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyBoots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-03-07 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Rebublicans block withdrawl is a better frame. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-03-07 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. This isn't Reid-Feingold. This vote was unanimous.
I'm not sure how I managed to confuse you. 0 Dems voted against this.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radfringe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-03-07 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
3. JEEBUS on a jumprope - with all of these cave-ins by Dems
you would think the bush mine inspectors were running the party
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-03-07 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. Clever
:P

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truebrit71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-03-07 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
7. Who are the 21 Dems that DON'T want to exercise their CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY of oversight?
They need to be FIRED!!!

It is their JOB to oversee the WH...if they don't want the job we need to find people that will...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rjones2818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-03-07 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
10. I've gotten to the point where
I don't think it's the Dems caving. I think there's a batch of 'em who actually want W to have everything his heart desires. I'd say that Dems in the Senate and the House who'd vote the way most DUers seem to want them to is about 25-35% of the membership. The rest a faux Repugs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-04-07 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. I suspect that you are correct. (nm)
...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-04-07 07:54 AM
Response to Original message
12. BASTARDS!!!
:evilgrin:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 04:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC