Sub note Scotus just ruled against the ban on handguns in DC.

Blogs don’t do it. Too individually oriented. It might help if commenters were not identified and we dealt solely in ideas. We need an “Our space”. I’m not sure the form it would take, but something organized along Congressional districts and interacting might prove interesting.

The initial conversation some distance above was on the “Remove the cases from Cali to FISC” amendment, a different Feinstein amendment, but the exchange between me and another poster naturally creates the impression that Feinstein was caught in a brazen lie. She wasn’t (at least not on the “passed with 57 votes” point) – the poster made an innocent error of associating Feinstein’s comment with the “removal” amendment.

Feinstein 3910 (90 minutes) is an attempt to match the president’s Article II power with “exclusive means” statutory language REJECTED Feb 12, 2008 at 10:18, on a 57-41 vote (Lieberman, Nelson (NE) voted NAY. Collins, Craig, Hagel, Smith, Snowe, Specter, Sununu and Voinovich voted AYE. Clinton and Graham did not vote)

Feinstein 3919 (2 hours) removes the pending civil litigation pertaining to the TSP to the FISC and defines the standard of review leading to dismissal REJECTED Feb 12, 2008 at 12:01, on a 41-57 vote (Carper, Dodd, Inouye, Johnson, Landrieu, Lieberman, Menendez, Nelson (NE), Pryor, and Rockefeller voted NAY. Clinton and Graham did not vote)

I overlooked your question yesterday, and would have answered it then, had I seen it.

I’m not sure which, if any, amendments will be taken up for debate. Reid’s comments about what’s going to happen need to be taken with a grain of salt, but he’s said he wants a vote on an amendment that strips the part of the bill that gives retroactive immunity.

Senator Specter has a competing amendment. His is, IMO, smoke and mirrors just one layer removed. It says the government certification in support of the TSP and other surveillance alleged in the civil suit must “be supported by substantial evidence” and also empowers the court to find for the government if the court finds the surveillance to have been constitutional. Either way, the court could find for the government without expressing a conclusion as to whether or not FISA was breached.

I think there will be at least one amendment voted on, and I doubt it’ll be Specter’s. I think there will be an amendment to “Strip Title III,” which would be a clean vote against retroactive immunity, as in “Congress isn’t going to interfere in cases now underway.”

Obviously, it can’t change the underlying substantive bill. But it CAN (meaning possible, but not necessarily) make a big difference in how the legislative process will play out over time.

Deciding to proceed is a distinct step from voting on the bill itself, and a determined objector can cause delay at both steps. So, in order to compare what a Senator SAYS he’ll do, with what is actually done, it’s essential to understand the parliamentary process as well as examine the statutory language they are proffering, supporting, or opposing.

On the FISA bill, I think the difference is just an example of smoke and mirrors. One cloture vote, and some might say “See, there’s my strong opposition.” When in fact, strong opposition has an opportunity for further delay.

As an “at the end of the day” substantive matter, the distinction is meaningless. I believe the FISA bill will be passed. The parliamentary question is “on which day?”

I opined at the start of the week (actually, late last week, when the House was dicking around with this), that there would be one instance of cloture with rules-based timing (we’re in that one now), and one or maybe two more votes with 60 votes needed – but those 60 vote thresholds happening without invoking the cloture process with its attendant delays.

Just hearing on the news too (FauxNews), that the Senate is expected to pass FISA today.

Bookmark Official Tally of Senate Votes and you’ll be able to check all of the votes, delayed by 30-90 minutes. I capture some votes faster than that – if I’m paying attention.

18:23: The Motion to Concur in the House Amendment to the Senate Amendment striking sec. 1 through Title V and Inserting Language to the Senate Amdt. to
H.R.3221 – the Housing and Economic Recovery Act, was PASSED on a
79-16 vote.

Bastards.

There most certainly should be an organized demonstration of some sort at the convention in Denver.

I suggest any money anyone sends be sent to Regina in GA, to give Obama a little “fist bump” of a different kind.

.