11 ms·

Here is a link to how the senators voted[1]. [1]https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1182/vote_118_2_00150.htm https://www.senate.gov/leg

• bwanab 2y ago
  It's the first time I can ever remember on a contested vote where both the two Democratic Senators from my current bluer than blue state voted the same (nay) as the two Republican Senators from my former redder than red state. Strange bedfellows in interesting times.
  • throwaway35777 2y ago
    {Montana, North Dakota} --> {Washington}?
• bilekas 2y ago
  You don't see any value in FISA?
  • bilekas 2y ago
    Lots of people downvote. Would love opinions.
• hackernewds 2y ago
  what change would a call affect?
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• hellcow 2y ago
  I'm really disappointed that even in CA (which is pushing for better privacy rights with CCPA), one of our senators voted for this.
  • verdverm 2y ago
    Are you aware the alternative is less oversight? FISA protects Americans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveilla...
    • geuis 2y ago
      I obviously can't guess your age, but I'm gonna wager you weren't around much prior to 9/11. The world was getting on quite well without massive surveillance creep, and none of the stuff FISA has done in the last 23 years would have stopped it. The authorities already had all the info they needed back then and just didn't act on it.
      • borkt 2y ago
        FISA has been in existence since 1978. It did not prevent 9/11, so honestly your comment undersells how worthless the program has been in light of the constitutional freedoms we willingly cede in reauthorizing it. The fact is though it remains law and the officials we elected feel the value is worth it. I hope its being done solely based on the benefits it provides us as a whole and is not being used for self-serving purposes
        • tastyfreeze 2y ago
          > used for self-serving purposes That is inevitable. If there is an easier path to a goal some human will use it. It doesn't matter if the goal is against the people.
        • unethical_ban 2y ago
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act_of_1978_Amendments_Act_of_2008 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveilla... 2008.
          • Retric 2y ago
• rightbyte 2y ago
  So 55 needed for passing and 60 voted for. Closer then I thought it would be.
  • int_19h 2y ago
    Once enough votes are there to secure the bill, there's no reason for either party to "waste" any more votes of their members on something that can be so politically unpopular with large parts of their electorate.
• karaterobot 2y ago
  People generally vote for the incumbent if they happen to claim the same party affiliation. They complain for 4-6 years, then when it comes to what box they tick on the ballot, all of that is out the window. The lure of an incumbent is that they might have acquired enough markers and enough seats on various committees to help the state, when it often seems the reality is that they've probably just acquired more lobbyist friends and more incentive to stay in office no matter what. Sure, they may be corrupt and incompetent, but they've got so much influence!
  • Onawa 2y ago
    The joys of the "first past the post" election system. Take your choice of a shit sandwich, or a shit sandwich with pickles. Heaven forbid we actually update our voting system to break up the inevitable 2-party outcome.
    • chiefalchemist 2y ago
      Heaven might not forbid, but the two ruling parties certainly do. Breaking out of the status quo would crush their cartel, end their monopoly. They don't want to do that. The cycle continues.
• sunshine_reggae 2y ago
  Do these people know who you are?!
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• superkuh 2y ago
  It terrible it passed but I'm glad both Wisconsin senators voted no. They voted no for completely different reasons but I'll take it.