cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/58562989
The House of Representatives is set to vote Wednesday on renewing a spy power that grants the Trump administration warrantless access to thousands of Americans’ communications.
While uniting against President Donald Trump on many fronts, Democrats are split on what to do over the domestic spying power — and the party’s leadership isn’t giving much guidance, according to a congressional notice obtained by The Intercept.
In the notice laying out leadership’s advice on bills up for a vote this week, Democratic Whip Katherine Clark simply explained that the relevant top committee leaders were split. House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Jim Himes supports a clean reauthorization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, while Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin wants further reforms.
Clark gave straight up-or-down recommendations on many other pieces of legislation, but not the spying law.
With leadership silent, progressive activists are trying to step into the void to pressure members. They say Trump’s disregard for the rule of law in his second term means that representatives should only vote for the law with reforms. Government officials have engaged a pattern of abuses at the Justice Department.
Centrists on two key committees, on the other hand, say that modest changes enacted in 2024 went far enough and Congress should give Trump the so-called “clean” reauthorization he has requested.
With Republicans themselves divided, the margin within the Democratic caucus could prove crucial.
Rather than advising members how to vote, however, Democratic leaders is stepping aside. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., has said that he personally supports reforms but has not signaled that he will pressure his caucus. (Jeffries’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)
Fascist collaboration.
Democrats have no actual problems with anything Republicans have done or are doing.
They have problems with how Republicans have done these things. The problem with Donald Trump, from the DNC’s point of view, is that he is crass, rash, and not secretive enough.
If he had just kept the concentration camps a secret, like Obama did, they’d be fine with it. If Trump waited to find a better casus belli against Iran, like Biden was waiting on, then they’d be fine with it. If Trump had just couched his privatization of the VA and CDC in flowery language like Obama did with the ACA, they’d be fine with it. And let’s be honest, dems love spying on American citizens; so much they have positively voted on every single bill that has given any government agency that power.
Which isn’t surprising – the parties are not exactly that different; they’re owned and controlled by the. same. people.
You’re 100% correct I mean the whole Snowden thing happen under Obama and Obama didn’t do shit but mark Snowden a domestic terrorist.
Blanket statements collapse important differences within the party.
They erase the hard work of progressive members like Jamie Raskin, who is pushing for warrant requirements and reforms on FISA.
They belittle votes against surveillance expansions by figures like Ron Wyden, who has consistently fought Section 702 backdoor searches.
And they ignore primaries where challengers to incumbents run to the left on civil liberties.
If you want change, name names: Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, Jim Himes, the ones who actively shield the surveillance status quo. Then organize primaries or pressure campaigns against them.
The both sides same argument ironically lets those specific Democrats off the hook. Because if nothing can change, why bother trying at all?
The list of people currently against the owners of the US is much smaller than the list of democrats that support the republicans. Over 88% of congress is controlled by AIPAC; including many ‘progressives’ Like Hakem Jefferies. Voting them in makes absolutely zero difference in most things; especially when it comes to whatever the owners of the US want.
That being said vote if you want to, but know you can’t get out of a fascist empire by voting.
AIPAC does have a hold on Congress and just voting won’t work. You need pressure in primaries for progressive candidates and you need to organize.
However, If voting didn’t matter then why does AIPAC spend over $100 million per cycle to primary anyone who steps out of line? Why did they bury Andy Levin? Why did they prop up Haley Stevens?
They’re not stupid. They spend that money because voting works just not always in the direction we want. The goal isn’t to give up on voting. It’s to make sure the votes that happen are for people who aren’t owned.
You can’t vote your way out of a fascist empire. But you also can’t organize your way out either if you’ve ceded every lever of power to the other side. You need both.
Why would they fight what they want for themselves?
Why do we have trump? One reason is fox news. Another is Elmo and assorted billionaires / oil industry. Another is reflected in the comments here.
I’d like to say these are exactly the kinds of comments I was posting in the early 2000s. Although it doesn’t seem like it, the Democrats have improved - gotten more progressive, more vocal about it, and in other ways. And yes, they’re still woefully behind where we want them to be.
The system exists to be changed, without violence, and it has been done many times in the past. Such that we take those seismic changes for granted now.
People who inevitably promote non-voting are like people who argue against eating. Yes, there are other ways to sustain life but none of them are readily available to the staff at the Try-N-Sav, much less practical. This is the method we have now. And it can - and more often than it gets credit for, it does - work.
