3 ms·

This draft law is for show only. It's not going to be enacted; it's being pushed by Ron Wyden, a Democrat who's far more progressive than the rest of his party

by Arizhel 10y ago

This draft law is for show only. It's not going to be enacted; it's being pushed by Ron Wyden, a Democrat who's far more progressive than the rest of his party, and in a Congress that's totally controlled by Republicans, with an America-first Republican in the White House. There isn't a chance this law will be passed. He might as well be promoting a bill to introduce single-payer socialized medicine in the US along with a Universal Basic Income.

smhenderson 10y ago
This draft law is for show only. Sometimes that's the best a representative can do. That doesn't mean it has no value. It raises awareness, keeps the issue on the public record and, hopefully, eventually, leads to a pull toward the center and some reasonable compromise.
- logfromblammo 10y ago
  It may also be used as campaign propaganda. Everyone who votes against your bill may one day see a campaign ad saying, "Rep./Sen. Whatsname voted in favor of warrantless searches of your personal electronic files, when all you wanted was to come back home." Such is undoubtedly why bills of this nature are smothered in committee by politicians who are so secure in their gerrymandered districts that they could bite the head off of a baby on live television the day before election day and still win the seat.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
jlgaddis 10y ago
I'm not disagreeing with you, you may very well be correct. The alternative, however, is that Senator Wyden simply "accepts defeat" and does nothing. That's not what I prefer.
rosser 10y ago
My gut inclination is to agree with you, but this is also the same congress whose lower house recently unanimously passed a bill requiring a warrant to access stored online communications, instead of merely a subpoena. I think it neither terribly constructive nor useful to attempt to cast every issue in a partisan light.

by Arizhel 10y ago

smhenderson 10y ago

This draft law is for show only. Sometimes that's the best a representative can do. That doesn't mean it has no value. It raises awareness, keeps the issue on the public record and, hopefully, eventually, leads to a pull toward the center and some reasonable compromise.

logfromblammo 10y ago
It may also be used as campaign propaganda. Everyone who votes against your bill may one day see a campaign ad saying, "Rep./Sen. Whatsname voted in favor of warrantless searches of your personal electronic files, when all you wanted was to come back home." Such is undoubtedly why bills of this nature are smothered in committee by politicians who are so secure in their gerrymandered districts that they could bite the head off of a baby on live television the day before election day and still win the seat.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

jlgaddis 10y ago

I'm not disagreeing with you, you may very well be correct. The alternative, however, is that Senator Wyden simply "accepts defeat" and does nothing. That's not what I prefer.

rosser 10y ago

My gut inclination is to agree with you, but this is also the same congress whose lower house recently unanimously passed a bill requiring a warrant to access stored online communications, instead of merely a subpoena. I think it neither terribly constructive nor useful to attempt to cast every issue in a partisan light.