> For one Protect America Act addresses changes in technology that neither FISA nor AUMF directly address. No, you're right; I'll concede that. Both PAA and F

> For one Protect America Act addresses changes in technology that neither FISA nor AUMF directly address. No, you're right; I'll concede that. Both PAA and FAA modify law established through the PATRIOT Act, but neither touch Section 215. I was trying to make a point more about hypocrisy and failure to perform oversight. He voted to amend the PATRIOT Act multiple times after the bulk collection program was publicly disclosed[1], but didn't do anything back then. We shouldn't have to fault him for lack of concern or imagination - he should have been sitting in on the classified briefings. There's no excuse for him to not know about this or any other NSA program that was briefed to the Judicial Committee, and he shouldn't be voting to amend his own law without understanding how it's being applied. He's says now that he's opposed to bulk collection, but he could voiced his support to end to it a decade ago by just doing his job. > just lets it expire including all of the far less controversial programs It's my understanding that only 3 provisions of the PATRIOT Act are set to sunset: Section 215, Section 206 ("roving wiretaps") and Section 6001 (the 'lone wolf' provision). [1] http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-ns...