Update: President Obama signed the Patriot Act bill from France with his auto-pen.

Update: House passes Senate bill, 250 to 153.

The Senate today, by a vote of 72 - 23, approved the extension of the Patriot Act's provisions on roving wiretaps, access to business records and "lone wolf" surveillance. The House is debating now and will hold a vote imminently.You can watch the debate here. President Obama will be woken up at 5:45 a.m. tomorrow to sign it.

DOJ's tricks are working. After the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Washington sent a letter to the legislature warning that passage of a medical marijuana licensing bill would subject state workers to federal prosecution, today Governor Christine Gregoire vetoed the bill, saying she was "swayed" by the letter. (Background on the almost identical letters sent by a number of U.S. attorneys in recent weeks in states where medical marijuana is legal is here.)

More U.S. Attorneys are jumping on the bandwagon. Today, it was the U.S. Attorney for Rhode Island, sending almost a verbatim letter, even though he hadn't been asked for his position.

And in Montana today, Governor Brian Schweitzer let the bill that passed the legislature this week restricting medical marijuana become law by doing nothing. His lame explanation: [More...]

Montana has allowed medical marijuana since 2004. Today, the Senate joined the House in passing a reform bill. It now heads to the Governor. You can read the bill, SB 423 (SB0423.ENR) here. Among the key provisions:

• The law repeals the existing Montana Medical Marijuana Act.
• Lawmakers specified a list of debilitating medical conditions which qualify for a medical marijuana card and defined a standard of care that doctors must comply with to issue a card. The bill now prohibits telemedicine.
• Lawmakers placed regulatory authority with the Department of Health.
• The committee limited the number of plants a card-holder can have to 4 mature plants, 12 seedlings and 1 oz of usable marijuana.
• The amended bill defines chronic pain and forces a patient to either have proof of pain or have 2 doctors certify a chronic pain patient.

[More...]

The House today voted to strip NPR of federal funding.

It's a symbolic vote. Democrats in the Senate won't pass it, if they will even allow it to reach a vote. And the White House opposes it, and President Obama would veto it.

With all the problems going on in the world, it's ridiculous that Republicans would waste time on something like this.

The Senate Judiciary Committee today approved the extension of three controversial provisions of the Patriot Act. The bill was ordered reported by a roll call vote of 10-7. One Republican, Mike Lee of Utah, voted for Leahy's bill. The Obama administration and the Attorney General supported Leahy's bill.

Sen. Leahy said the bill approved by the committee contains added civil liberties and privacy protections. He introduced S. 193 on January 26. It is available here and here. Several amendments were made and voted on today. You can see them here (scroll down to bills section.)[More...]

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is decrying the Republican cuts to the Homeland Security Budget. She testified before the House Homeland Security Committee today and said the cuts would add to delays for airline passengers. I'm not buying it. And, I think the cuts are a good thing. Who wants more of this?

The House budget "cuts technology investments and security improvements on the Southwest and Northern borders," Napolitano said.
"It cuts aviation security measures. It cuts funding to sustain the progress that has been made in enforcing the nation's immigration laws. It cuts critical cyber security tools and operations. It cuts intelligence personnel. It cuts Coast Guard funding to support our war efforts abroad. And it cuts grants that support counterterrorism and disaster-response capabilities at the local level," she added.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg joined in the fear-mongering: [More...]

The House of Representatives didn't feel any love for our privacy rights today. It passed the bill extending three intrusive privacy provisions of the Patriot Act. The ACLU says:

“It has been nearly a decade since the Patriot Act was passed and our lawmakers still refuse to make any meaningful changes to this reactionary law. The right to privacy from government is a cornerstone of our country’s foundation and Americans must be free from the kind of unwarranted government surveillance that the Patriot Act allows. If Congress cannot take the time to insert the much needed privacy safeguards the Patriot Act needs, it should allow these provisions to expire.”

Anyone else not feeling the love for Congress these days?

Via the ACLU: please take action tonight as a vote on extending the Patriot Act may occur tomorrow.

Today the House voted to put the bill on the calendar.(It was defeated earlier this week in a vote requiring 2/3 approval. Now, a simple majority will do. Here's the bill.

Some news sites are reporting the vote won't be until next week. Either way, let your Congresspersons know how you feel tonight. Extending the Patriot Act won't makes us safer but it will make us less free.

Tea Partiers helped defeat a House Bill to extend three controversial provisions of the Patriot Act until December. The provisions expire next month:

The Patriot Act bill would have renewed the authority for court-approved roving wiretaps that permit surveillance on multiple phones. Also addressed was Section 215, the so-called library records provision, which gives the FBI court-approved access to "any tangible thing" relevant to a terrorism investigation.

The third deals with the "lone-wolf" provision of a 2004 anti-terror law that permits secret intelligence surveillance of non-U.S. people not known to be affiliated with a specific terror organization.

Obama sought a three year extension. Senate Republicans want to make them permanent. It is likely to be a temporary victory:

Republican leaders will bring the bill back to the floor under a rule, where it will almost certainly secure the 218-vote threshold.

Joan McCarter covers Claire McCasklil's political gimmickry on the budget (I think it is stupid politics on her part, but who knows?). While Joan details how awful the proposal is on substance, I was struck by the brazen attempt to use a procedure that the Supreme Court has declared unconstitutional. Here's is the plan:

Enforcing Spending Caps[.] If federal spending is projected to exceed the CAP Act designated amount for that year, the OMB is required to sequester funds such that it brings federal spending back to the CAP Act mandated levels. [. . .] This concept is based in part on the sequestration requirements of the current PAYGO law and its predecessor, the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act.

The Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Balanced Budget Act and Emergency Deficit Act was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Bowsher v. Synar. Obviously this proposal is nothing but a political gimmick, with no chance of passage. Similar gimmicks which have been declared unconstitutional like the line item veto are also still trotted out. Is it too much to ask of our pols that they present better thought out gimmicks?

Speaking for me only

Republicans in the House show they know how to waste time. At their insistence, next week the House will vote on whether to repeal the new health care law. Republican's complaint with the bill:

Further, Obamacare failed to lower costs as the president promised that it would and does not allow people to keep the care they currently have if they like it. That is why the House will repeal it next week.”

Since it's unlikely to pass a Democrat-controlled Senate, and Obama would surely veto it if it did manage to pass, this is pure posturing and a waste of resources.

The Senate in action today. Dream Act has failed on the cloture vote. DADT is succeeds on cloture vote. Passage of DADT Repeal is now virtually assured.

By a vote of 250 to 175, the House of Representatives today passed a stand-alone bill to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT). The bill now goes to the Senate.

While the initial repeal measure failed in the Senate, Democrats are now confident they can find 60 votes there to pass this standalone bill. The party is working against time, however. Before they take up the "don't ask" repeal, Senate Democrats are committed to taking up other significant issues, like the ratification of a nuclear treaty with Russia and a government-funding bill. The Senate is attempting to take up all of these matters before breaking for Christmas recess.

Update: It looks like the deal will pass.

The House Democratic Caucus has voted to reject President Obama's compromise tax deal.

While this doesn’t necessarily scuttle the whole tax deal, it is “highly unlikely” that the tax-cut agreement will come to the floor as is, according to senior Democratic aides. A tax compromise could still pass if an overwhelming majority of Republicans voted for it alongside several dozen Democrats.

The White House responds:

“The House and Senate are working through the normal process of bringing a bill forward, and we are confident that the major components of the tax framework that we fought for will remain in the final package brought to the floor and ultimately passed by Congress,”

The Senate is proceeding to consider the bill this afternoon.

The Dream Act has passed the House, by a vote of 216-198. The bill will help immigrant students and servicemembers. It go to the Senate tomorrow, where it faces uncertain odds. What does it mean?

Tn brief, the DREAM Act would enable some immigrant students who have grown up in the U.S. to apply for temporary legal status and to eventually obtain permanent status and become eligible for U.S. citizenship if they go to college or serve in the U.S. military.

Sen. Michael Bennet:

Support for the DREAM Act is not only a matter of conscience for me since it’s the right thing to do; it’s also a practical solution. Continue delay is an irresponsible waste.

“We owe it to the tax payers who have invested in these youth, the teachers who have fostered their development and our military who can benefit from the energy of these youth to move forward on the DREAM Act. ”