| |
 |
| March 13th, 2008 |
|
Media Contact(s): Mark Eddington or Jared Whitley (202) 224-5251 |
[  ] Listen to Radio Clip |
Printable Version |
[  ] Watch Television Clip |
|
HATCH REBUKES HOUSE LEADERS FOR BLOCKING ANTI-TERRORIST LEGISLATION
|
| |
WASHINGTON – Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) joined Sen. Kit Bond (R-Mo.), House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) today in urging House leaders to quit playing politics with national security and pass the Senate’s Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act modernization bill.
Last month, the Senate overwhelmingly approved FISA, and the bill has been stalled in the House ever since. Even though FISA enjoys bipartisan support and would pass, House leaders have refused to allow a vote on the Senate’s bill, choosing instead to draft a bill that would hamstring U.S. intelligence experts and could embolden terrorists.
Hatch’s remarks, delivered at today’s FISA press conference, follow: Pet
This Congress has been working on FISA modernization for almost 330 days, with apparently no end in sight. Should it really take this long? The Constitution of the United States was written in about 115 days, and that included travel time on horseback for the Founding Fathers. So the entire Constitution of the United States was written in one-third of the time we’ve spent on FISA modernization. Congress has had plenty of time to debate this issue.
We have to make sure that we don’t create unnecessary obstacles for our intelligence analysts to track terrorists. As has been said, they can’t connect the dots if they can’t collect the dots.
The House should promise protection, not partisanship.
Let’s compare the legislative process between the chambers:
The Senate bill was publically available for nearly four months before it was voted on, the House bill: one day.
The Senate bill has the support of a bipartisan majority of the Senate, House, and support of the Intelligence Community, national police organizations and the President. The House bill is not supported by a bipartisan majority of the Senate or the House, and opposed by the Intelligence Community and the President.
Make no mistake: the bill that the House is considering is NOT a compromise. It creates more differences between the chambers, not less. The House bill continues the undemocratic idea of oversight through litigation.
The fear mongering in this debate would have Americans terrified of their fellow citizens who actually protect them. How is it acceptable to question the integrity of the thousands of Americans who have taken an oath to defend the Constitution, and who have dedicated their lives to preventing our great nation from suffering an attack?
I’m sorry to break it to people, but our intelligence analysts have more important things to do than look at someone’s eBay transactions, and listen to phone calls from the Jones family on their family vacation in Italy. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by these conspiracy theories, given the vocal lunacy expressed by those in the public who think the Sept. 11 attacks were an “inside job.”
The House has a choice: listen to the bipartisan majority of its members and vote on the Senate bill, or force them to vote on a partisan bill that moves the debate backwards. It’s that simple.
|
| |
| ### |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
