Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
HOPEFULLY, PRAYERFULLY TOGETHER
WE CAN ASPIRE TO A COMMON
PURPOSE TO BRING ENDURING PEACE
TO THE BIRTHPLACE OF THAT
HERITAGE.
MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD THE
FLOOR.
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM MONTANA.
THANK YOU,
MR. PRESIDENT.
TODAY, MR. PRESIDENT, WE HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO DO AWAY WITH A
LAW THAT TRAMPLES ON OUR
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, A LAW
THAT INVADES THE PRIVACY OF
LAW-ABIDING MONTANANS AND
AMERICANS, A LAW THAT DEPRIVES
AMERICA OF SOME OF OUR MOST
BASIC CONSTITUTIONAL
PROTECTIONS.
THIS WEEK, WE'RE VOTING ON
WHETHER TO EXTEND THE U.S.A.
PATRIOT ACT FOUR MORE YEARS AS
IS, AND THERE'S A CHANCE THAT WE
MAY NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
CHANGE IT, EVEN THOUGH WE KNOW
COMPROMISED.
THAT OUR FREEDOMS HAVE BEEN
AND THAT IS A SHAME, BECAUSE
WITHOUT THAT POSSIBILITY, WE'RE
NOT HAVING THE DEBATE THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE DESERVE.
IF OUR ONLY CHOICE IS TO VOTE
"NO."
"YES" OR "NO," I'M GOING TO VOTE
LONG BEFORE I EVER GOT TO THE
SENATE, THE PATRIOT ACT WAS SOLD
TO US AS A TOOLBOX OF SORTS TO
GIVE U.S. AGENTS THE TOOLS THEY
NEED TO FIND AND FIGHT AND KILL
TERRORISTS.
WHAT WE GOT FROM THE PATRIOT ACT
WAS A LAW THAT IS KILLING THE
RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY OUR
CONSTITUTION.
IT GIVES OUR GOVERNMENT FULL
AUTHORITY TO DIG THROUGH YOUR
PRIVATE RECORDS OR TAP YOUR
PHONES OR MAKE A CASE AGAINST
YOU WITHOUT EVEN HAVING A
JUDGE'SJUDGE'S WARRANT, EVEN IF YOU'RE
DOING NOTHING WRONG.
WE GIVE UP OUR RIGHTS,
MR. PRESIDENT, WE GIVE AWAY --
WE GIVE WAY TO EXACTLY WHAT THE
TERRORISTS WANTED FOR US --
FEWER FREEDOMS AND INVASION OF
PRIVACY.
IT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE IN MONTANA
AND I'M SURE IT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE
ANYWHERE ELSE.
MORE THAN 200 YEARS AGO, ONE OF
OUR FOUNDERS OF THIS COUNTRY
WARNED US, AND HERE'S WHAT HE
SAID.
"THOSE WHO GIVE UP ESSENTIAL
LIBERTY TO PURCHASE A LITTLE
TEMPORARY SAFETY DESERVE NEITHER
LIBERTY NOR SAFETY."
FRANKLIN.
WORDS OF WISDOM FROM BENJAMIN
OUR NATION WAS FOUNDED ON THE
PRINCIPLES OF FREEDOM AND
PRIVACY AND A GOVERNMENT THAT WE
CONTROL.
WE GOT EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE WITH
THE PATRIOT ACT.
MR. PRESIDENT, HERE'S A COPY OF
THE CONSTITUTION.
IT'S A REMINDER OF OUR RIGHTS AS
AMERICANS GUARANTEED BY THE
FOURTH AMENDMENT.
AND I QUOTE -- "THE RIGHT OF THE
PEOPLE TO BE SECURE IN THEIR
PERSONS, HOUSES, PAPERS AND
EFFECTS AGAINST UNREASONABLE
SEARCHES AND SEIZURES SHALL NOT
BE VIOLATED."
THE FOLKS WHO WROTE THE PATRIOT
ACT WERE HERE IN WASHINGTON LONG
BEFORE I EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT
RUNNING FOR THE U.S. SENATE.
BUT YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE A
LAWYER TO KNOW THAT THE PATRIOT
ACT FLIES IN THE FACE OF THE
FOURTH AMENDMENT.
IT ALLOWS THE GOVERNMENT TO
CONDUCT SECRET PROCEEDINGS EVEN
WHEN THOSE PROCEEDINGS DON'T
NEED TO BE HELD IN SECRET.
AND IF WE ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN,
WE TOSS GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY
AND ACCOUNTABILITY OUT THE
WINDOW.
AS WE'VE SEEN OVER THE PAST FEW
WEEKS, OUR MILITARY FORCES AND
INTELLIGENCE AGENTS ARE THE MOST
EFFECTIVE IN THE WORLD.
THEY ARE THE BEST BECAUSE THEY
HAVE THE MOST POWERFUL TOOLS IN
THE WORLD TO DO THEIR JOBS.
THEY ARE BETTER TRAINED THAN
ANYONE ELSE, THEY'RE STRONGER,
THEY'RE SMARTER AND THEY DO WHAT
THEY DO WITHOUT NEEDING TO SNOOP
AROUND IN THE PRIVATE LIVES OF
LAW-ABIDING AMERICANS AND
MONTANANS.
WITHOUT HAVING TO DIG UP YOUR
MEDICAL RECORDS OR YOUR GUN
RECORDS OR YOUR LIBRARY RECORDS
OR YOUR INTERNET RECORDS,
MR. PRESIDENT, THE PATRIOT ACT
IS BAD POLICY THAT HAS PUT US ON
A VERY SLIPPERY SLOPE.
OUR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOMS ARE
TOO VALUABLE TO GIVE EVEN AN
INCH OF THEM AWAY, ESPECIALLY
WHEN WE DON'T NEED TO.
AND WITHOUT THE OPPORTUNITY TO
MAKE REAL CHANGES TO THIS BILL,
OUR ONLY OPTION IS TO A OHIE" OR
"NO" TO EXTENDING THIS LAW FOUR
MORE YEARS F. WE DO, AN
ENTIRE -- MORE YEARS.
IF WE DO, AN ENTIRE DECADE WILL
HAVE PASSED WITHOUT MAKING ANY
ADJUSTMENTS.
NOT HAVING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO
AMEND THE PATRIOT ACT, I'M GOING
TO VOTE AGAINST IT IN THE NAME
OF FREEDOM AND PRIVACY.
AND I'M GOING TO ENCOURAGE ALL
SENATORS TO DO THE SAME BECAUSE
DO.
IT'S THE RESPONSIBLE THING TO
AND WITH THAT, MR. PRESIDENT, I
YIELD THE FLOOR.
I SUGGEST THE ABSENCE OF A
QUORUM.
THE CLERK
WILL CALL THE ROLL.
I SUGGEST THE
ABSENCE OF A QUORUM AND ASK THAT
THE TIME BE EVENLY DIVIDED.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
AND THE CLERK WILL CALL THE
ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
PROVISIONS OF THE PATRIOT ACT.
THESE THREE PROVISIONS ARE
ROVING WIRETAPS, SECTION 215
IMPIS RECORD ORDERS, AND THE
LONE WOLF PROVISIONS.
THESE ARE ALL VERY IMPORTANT
TOOLS USED TO INVESTIGATE AND
PREVENT TERRORISTS ATTACKS.
THEY HAVE BEEN REAUTHORIZED A
NUMBER OF TIMES, BUT IT SEEMS
THAT IN RECENT YEARS WE'VE BEEN
DISCUSSING ONLY VERY SHORT-TERM
EXTENSIONS OF THESE CRITICAL
TOOLS.
THAT IS WHY I WILL SUPPORT THE
CLOTURE PETITION ON MOVING TO
S. 1038 TODAY.
THIS LEGISLATION PROVIDES A
FOUR-YEAR EXTENSION OF THE THREE
EXPIRING PROVISIONS WITHOUT ANY
SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES TO THE
EXISTING AUTHORITIES, AND I
BELIEVE THERE DOES NOT NEED TO
BE CHANGES TO EXISTING
AUTHORITIES.
REGARDLESS OF MY SUPPORT FOR
TODAY'S CLOTURE VOTE AND SUPPORT
FOR THE FOUR-YEAR EXTENSION, I
WANT MY COLLEAGUES TO KNOW THAT
I SUPPORT A PERMANENT EXTENSION
OF THE THREE EXPIRING
PROVISIONS.
HAVING THIS DEBATE YEAR AFTER
YEAR OFFERS LITTLE CERTAINTY TO
AGENTS UTILIZING THESE
PROVISIONS TO COMBAT TERRORISM.
IT ALSO LEADS TO OPERATIONAL
UNCERTAINTY, JEOPARDIZES
COLLECTION OF CRITICAL
INTELLIGENCE, AND COULD LEAD TO
COMPLIANCE AND REPORTING
PROBLEMS IF THE REAUTHORIZATION
OCCURS TOO CLOSE TO THE
EXPIRATION OF THE LAW AND WE'RE
GETTING VERY CLOSE TO THAT.
IF WE BELIEVE THAT THESE TOOLS
ARE NECESSARY -- AND I CLEARLY
STATE I BELIEVE THEY ARE
NECESSARY -- WE NEED TO PROVIDE
SOME CERTAINTY AS OPPOSED TO
SIMPLY REVISITING THE LAW YEAR
AFTER YEAR.
GIVEN THE INDEFINITE THREAT THAT
WE FACE FROM ACTS OF TERRORISM,
IT IS MY VIEW THAT WE SHOULD
PERMANENTLY REAUTHORIZE THESE
THREE EXPIRING PROVISIONS.
THIS POSITION IS SUPPORTED BY
AGENTS ON THE GROUND USING THESE
TOOLS EVERY DAY.
I HAVE LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM
INVESTIGATION AGENTS ASSOCIATION
THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF
SUPPORTING A PERMANENT
REAUTHORIZATION OF THE THREE
EXPIRING PROVISIONS.
THE FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICERS ASSOCIATION ALSO
SUPPORTS A PERMANENT EXTENSION
OF THE PROVISIONS.
IN FACT, A VERY IMPORTANT
PASSAGE OF THAT LETTER STATES --
QUOTE -- "CRIMES AND TERRORISM
WILL NOT SUNSET AND ARE STILL
TARGETING OUR NATION AND
AMERICAN CITIZENS.
JUST LIKE HANDCUFFS, THE PATRIOT
ACT SHOULD BE A PERMANENT PART
OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ARSENAL."
THEN WE HAVE ANOTHER LETTER FROM
THE SOCIETY OF FORMER SPECIAL
AGENTS TO THE F.B.I., AND THAT
LETTER -- QUOTE -- "WE URGE
CONGRESS TO REAUTHORIZE THE
EXPIRING PROVISIONS OF THE
PATRIOT ACT PERMANENTLY AND
WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS AS THE
THREE EXPIRING PROVISIONS ARE
ESSENTIAL TO THE SECURITY OF OUR
COUNTRY."
END OF QUOTE.
MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT THESE LETTERS BE A
PART OF THE RECORD.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
IN ADDITION TO
AGENTS ON THE GROUND, WE'VE
HEARD STRONG SUPPORT FOR
EXTENDING THE EXPIRING
PROVISIONS OF THE PATRIOT ACT
FROM MEMBERS OF THE BUSH AND
OBAMA ADMINISTRATIONS.
WE'VE HEARD TESTIMONY FROM THE
DIRECTOR OF THE F.B.I., THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THE
DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL
INTELLIGENCE ABOUT THE STRONG
NEED TO REAUTHORIZE THESE
PROVISIONS.
THESE SAME OFFICES HAVE
RECOMMENDED EXTENDING THE
PROVISIONS REGARDLESS OF
POLITICAL IDEOLOGY, AS BOTH
REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRAT
ADMINISTRATIONS HAVE BACKED THE
EXTENSIONS.
THE FOUR-YEAR EXTENSION WE'RE
VOTING ON TODAY IS A STEP IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION.
EXTENDING THE THREE EXPIRING
PROVISIONS WITHOUT ANY
SUBSTANTIVE AMENDMENT THAT WOULD
RESTRICT OR CURTAIL THE USE OF
THESE TOOLS IS VERY IMPORTANT
GIVEN THE RECENT ACTIONS THAT
LED TO THE DEATH OF OSAMA BIN
LADEN.
NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO PLACE NEW
RESTRICTIONS AND HEIGHTEN
EVIDENTIARY STANDARDS ON
CRITICAL NATIONAL SECURITY
TOOLS.
A LOT HAS BEEN SAID ABOUT THESE
PROVISIONS, AND UNFORTUNATELY
MOST OF WHAT HAS BEEN SAID IS
INCORRECT.
CONGRESS ENACTED THESE
PROVISIONS AND REAUTHORIZED THEM
IN 2005 FOLLOWING THE 9/11
COMMISSION REPORT WHICH
CRITICIZED THE WAY OUR AGENTS
FAILED TO PIECE TOGETHER CLUES.
IN OTHER WORDS, TO CONNECT THE
DOTS.
SINCE THAT TIME THE THREE
EXPIRING PROVISIONS HAVE
PROVIDED A GREAT DEAL OF
INFORMATION TO AGENTS THAT HAVE
HELPED THWART TERRORIST ATTACKS.
AND LET'S BE VERY BASIC, WHAT IS
TERRORISM ABOUT?
IT'S ABOUT KILLING PEOPLE LIVING
AMERICA.
IN WESTERN EUROPE AND NORTH
THEY DON'T LIKE US.
THEY WANT TO KILL US.
AND WE'VE GOT TO PREVENT THAT.
THEY CAN MAKE CONTINUING
MISTAKES AND NOT GET THEIR JOB
DONE, BUT ONCE THE F.B.I. MAKES
A MISTAKE AND LETS ONE OF THEM
GET AWAY, IT'S A VICTORY FOR THE
OPPOSITION.
WE CAN'T AFFORD A FAILURE.
NOW, EXAMPLES ALONG THE LINES
THAT WE CAN'T HAVE THESE
FAILURES, IN TESTIMONY BEFORE
THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM
AND HOMELAND SECURITY, ROBERT
LITT, THE GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF
NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, TESTIFIED
THAT A SECTION 215 ORDER WAS
USED AS PART OF THE
INVESTIGATION BY THE F.B.I. IN
THE KHALID ALDAWASA R EU WHO WAS
ARRESTED IN TEXAS RECENTLY.
MR. LITT ALSO TESTIFIED THE 215
ORDERS WERE UTILIZED TO OBTAIN
HOTEL RECORDS IN THE CASE WHERE
A SUSPECTED SPY HAD ARRANGED
LODGING FOR INTELLIGENCE
OFFICERS.
HE ALSO DISCUSSED THE ROVING
WIRETAP PROVISIONS AND HOW IT IS
USED TO HELP AGENTS TRACK
FOREIGN AGENTS OPERATING INSIDE
THE UNITED STATES WHO SWITCH
CELLULAR PHONES FREQUENTLY TO
AVOID BEING CAUGHT.
THESE EXAMPLES ARE LIMITED NOT
BECAUSE THE AUTHORITIES AREN'T
VALUABLE, BUT BECAUSE OF HOW
SENSITIVE THE INVESTIGATIONS ARE
THAT UTILIZE THESE AUTHORITIES.
WHILE THE NEED FOR KEEPING
PERSONAL NATIONAL SECURITY
MATTERS CLASSIFIED MAY PREVENT
THE OPEN DISCUSSION OF FURTHER
EXAMPLES IN THIS SETTING HERE ON
THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE, IT IS
IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THESE
PROVISIONS ARE CONSTANTLY UNDER
STRICT SCRUTINY BY THE INSPECTOR
GENERAL AT THE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE AND BY CONGRESSIONAL
OVERSIGHT.
IN FACT, IN A MARCH 2008 REPORT,
THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT INSPECTOR
GENERAL EXAMINED THE F.B.I.'S
USE OF SECTION 215 ORDERS AND
FOUND -- QUOTE -- "WE DID NOT
IDENTIFY ANY ILLEGAL USE OF
SECTION 15 AUTHORITY."
END OF QUOTE.
FURTHER, THERE ARE NO REPORTED
ABUSES OF THE ROVING
SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY AND THE
LONE WOLF PROVISION HAS NOT YET
BEEN UTILIZED, SO IT IS WITHOUT
ABUSE AS WELL.
WHILE I TKPWHRAE THESE THREE
PROVISIONS -- WHILE I AGREE
THESE THREE PROVISIONS SHOULD BE
SUBJECT TO STRICT SCRUTINY,
OVERSIGHT AUTHORITY ALREADY
EXISTS IN THE LAW AND DOES NOT
PROVIDE AUTHORITY FOR THESE
TOOLS TO ACHIEVE THE GOAL OF
OVERSIGHT.
AS SUCH, IT IS IMPORTANT THAT
CONGRESS REAUTHORIZE THESE
AMENDMENT.
PROVISIONS QUICKLY AND WITHOUT
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE IN
SUPPORT OF THE CLOTURE PETITION
ON THE MOTION TO PROCEED TO
S. 1038 BECAUSE IT PROVIDES A
CLEAN REAUTHORIZATION OF THESE
VERY VITAL TOOLS FOR FOUR YEARS
WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES.
IN OTHER WORDS, IF IT AIN'T
BROKE, DON'T FIX IT.
WHILE FOUR YEARS IS A FAR CRY
FROM THE PERMANENCE THAT I FEEL
IS NECESSARY ON THESE
PROVISIONS, IT DOES PROVIDE MORE
CERTAINTY AND PREDICTABILITY
THAN CONTINUING TO PASS
SHORT-TERM EXTENSION AFTER
EXTENSION.
I YIELD THE FLOOR.
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM KENTUCKY.
THERE'S BEEN A LOT
OF DISCUSSION OF THE PATRIOT
ACT, AND WE'RE TOLD BASICALLY WE
WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO CAPTURE
THESE TERRORISTS IF WE DIDN'T
GIVE UP SOME OF OUR LIBERTIES,
IF WE DIDN'T GIVE UP SOME OF THE
FOURTH AMENDMENT AND ALLOW IT TO
BE EASIER FOR THE POLICE TO COME
INTO OUR HOMES.
WE WERE SO FRIGHTENED AFTER 9/11
FREEDOMS.
THAT WE READILY GAVE UP THESE
WE SAID, WELL, THE FOURTH
AMENDMENT IS NOT THAT IMPORTANT.
WE'LL JUST LET THE GOVERNMENT
LOOK AT ALL OF OUR RECORDS AND
WE'LL MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE
GOVERNMENT TO LOOK AT OUR
RECORDS.
THE QUESTION YOU HAVE TO ASK,
THOUGH, IS WHETHER OR NOT WE
WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO CATCH
TERRORISTS BY USING THE FOURTH
AMENDMENT AS IT WAS INTENDED AND
HAVING THE PROTECTIONS OF THE
FOURTH AMENDMENT.
WHAT YOU HAVE TO ASK YOURSELF IS
THINK ABOUT THE WORST PERSON IN
YOUR COMMUNITY.
THINK ABOUT SOMEONE ACCUSED OF
*** OR *** OR A ***.
YOU THINK OF THESE PEOPLE; DO
YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENS IF SOMEONE
IS ACCUSED OF THAT?
EVEN IF IT'S 3:00 IN THE MORNING
AND THEY WANT TO GET THEIR
RECORDS OR THEY WANT TO GO INTO
THEIR HOUSE, THEY CALL A JUDGE.
IMPORTANT.
THIS IS SOMETHING VERY
THEY GET THE WARRANTS ALMOST ALL
THE TIME.
BUT IT'S ONE STEP OF PROTECTION.
WHAT YOU HAVE IS THE PROTECTION
WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE POLICE
OFFICERS WRITING WARRANTS TO
COME INTO YOUR HOUSE.
A JUDGE.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE IT REVIEWED BY
WHAT WE'VE DONE TO THE PATRIOT
ACT IS TAKEN AWAY SOME OF THE
AMENDMENT.
PROTECTIONS OF THE FOURTH
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT SAYS YOU
NEED TO NAME THE PERSON AND THE
PLACE TO BE SEARCHED.
PROTECTIONS.
WE'VE TAKEN AWAY THOSE
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT SAYS YOU
NEED TO HAVE PROBABLE CAUSE.
WE'VE TAKEN AWAY THOSE AND MADE
IT TO WHERE IT, IF IT'S RELEVANT
OR THEY THINK THEY MIGHT BE
RELATED TO IT.
ORIGINALLY THE FISA COURT
LOWERED THE STANDARD SOMEWHAT ON
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT, BUT IT
RECOGNIZED THAT IT WAS LOWERING
THE STANDARD AND WAS CAREFUL.
WE HAD SECRET COURTS SET UP AND
THE FISA COURT WAS THE COURT
THAT DEALT WITH THINGS THAT HAD
THAT TO DO WITH NATIONAL
SECURITY OR TERRORISM OR
INTELLIGENCE.
THE INFORMATION WAS KEPT SECRET
SO WE DIDN'T LET EVERYBODY IN
THE WORLD KNOW THE NAME BUT THE
NAME HAD TO BE DIE SRULGED TO
THE JUDGES.
THOSE WHO ARGUE YOU HAVE TO HAVE
THE PATRIOT ACT, TOUGH DO THIS
OR WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP
TERRORISM, THEY NEED TO EXPLAIN
WHY THE FISA COURT DID TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF SEARCH WARRANTS AND
NEVER TURNED ANY DOWN.
IN FACT, THE HISTORY BEFORE THE
PATRIOT ACT WAS NO SEARCH
WARRANT HAD EVER BEEN TURNED
DOWN.
DO WE REALLY WANT TO GIVE UP OUR
LIBERTIES IN EXCHANGE FOR
MILES-PER-HOUR SECURITY?
FRANKLIN -- IN EXCHANGE FOR MORE
SECURITY.
FRANKLIN SAID THOSE WHO GIVE UP
LIBERTY IN EXCHANGE FOR SECURITY
MAY END UP WITH NEITHER.
RIGHT NOW IF YOU HAVE A VISA
BILL THAT'S OVER $5,000 AND YOU
CHOOSE TO PAY FOR IT OVER THE
PHONE WHICH IS A WIRE TRANSFER,
THE GOVERNMENT IS PROBABLY
LOOKING AT YOUR VISA BILL.
THEY DON'T HAVE TO SHOW PROBABLE
CAUSE AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO
HAVE A JUDGE'S WARRANT.
AND THIS DOES APPLY TO U.S.
CITIZENS.
OFTEN THEY'LL TELL YOU IT'S ONLY
AT.
FOREIGN TERRORISTS WE'RE LOOKING
THEY WANT YOU TO FEEL GOOD ABOUT
ALLOWING THE SPYING, BUT THIS
SPYING IS GOING ON BY THE TENS
MILLIONS.
OF THOUSANDS AND EVEN BY THE
WITH REGARD TO THESE SUSPICIOUS
ACTIVITY REPORTS, WE'VE DONE
OVER 4 MILLION OF THEM IN THE
LAST TEN YEARS.
WE'RE NOW DOING OVER A MILLION A
YEAR.
THESE SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY
REPORTS, ALL THE TRIGGER IS YOU
DON'T HAVE TO HAVE ANYTHING TO
DO WITH TERRORISM.
THE TRIGGER IS YOU HAVE OVER
$5,000 THAT YOU TRANSFER BY BANK
ACCOUNT.
YOU SAY, WELL, THE COURTS HAVE
DECIDED THAT YOUR BANK RECORDS
AREN'T PRIVATE.
WELL, THE HELL THEY AREN'T.
THEY SHOULD BE PRIVATE.
MY VISA RECORDS, IF YOU LOOK AT
MY VISA RECORDS, YOU CAN TELL
WHETHER I GO TO THE DOCTOR, WHAT
KIND OF DOCTOR I GO TO.
YOU CAN CONCEIVABLY TELL WHAT
KIND OF MEDICATION I'M ON.
YOU CAN TELL WHAT KIND OF
MAGAZINES I READ.
YOU CAN TELL WHAT KIND OF BOOKS
I ORDER FROM AMAZON.
DO WE WANT A GOVERNMENT THAT
LOOKS AT OUR VISA BILL?
DO WE WANT A GOVERNMENT THAT
LOOKS AT OUR RECORDS AND IS
FINDING OUT WHAT OUR READING
HABITS ARE.
LIBRARY RECORDS.
ONE OF THE PROVISIONS APPLY TO
DO YOU WANT THE GOVERNMENT TO
FIND OUT WHAT YOU'RE READING AT
THE LIBRARY?
WE NOW HAVE A PRESIDENT THAT
WANTS TO KNOW WHERE YOU
CONTRIBUTED BEFORE YOU DO WORK
FOR THE GOVERNMENT.
DO WE WANT THAT KIND OF
ALL-ENCOMPASSING GOVERNMENT THAT
IS LOOKING AT EVERY RECORD FROM
PRIVACY?
TOP TO BOTTOM AND INVADING OUR
THERE IS ANOTHER ASPECT OF THIS
CALLED NATIONAL SECURITY
LETTERS.
THESE ARE BASICALLY WARRANTS
THAT ARE WRITTEN BY F.B.I.
AGENTS.
NO JUDGE REVIEWS THEM.
THIS IS SPECIFICALLY WHAT JAMES
OTIS WAS WORRIED ABOUT WHEN HE
TALKED ABOUT GENERAL WARRANTS
THAT WEREN'T SPECIFYING THE
PERSON OR THE PLACE AND THAT
WERE WRITTEN BY POLICE OFFICERS.
AND THIS IS A PROBLEM BECAUSE
REALLY THIS IS -- WE DEPEND ON
THE CHECKS AND BALANCES IN OUR
SOCIETY.
WE NEVER WANT TO GIVE ALL THE
AUTHORITY TO EITHER ONE GROUP OF
CONGRESS OR TO THE PRESIDENT OR
TO POLICE OR JUDGES.
WE HAVE CHECKS AND BALANCES TO
ABUSE.
APPROVE -- TO TRY TO PREVENT
NOW, SOME HAVE SAID, WELL, IF
YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, WHY DO
YOU CARE?
WELL, THE THING IS THAT IT WILL
NOT ALWAYS BE ANGELS THAT ARE IN
CHARGE OF GOVERNMENT.
YOU HAVE RULES BECAUSE YOU WANT
TO PREVENT THE DAY THAT MAY
OCCUR WHEN YOU GET SOMEONE WHO
TAKES OVER YOUR GOVERNMENT
THROUGH ELECTED OFFICE OR
OTHERWISE WHO REALLY IS INTENT
ON USING THE TOOLS OF GOVERNMENT
TO PRY INTO YOUR AFFAIRS, TO
SNOOP ON WHAT YOU'RE DOING, TO
PUNISH YOU FOR YOUR POLITICAL OR
RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.
THAT'S WHY WE DON'T EVER WANT TO
LET THE LAW BECOME SO EXPANSIVE.
BUT THE THING IS YOU HAVE TO
REALIZE THAT YOU CAN STILL GET
TERRORISTS.
WE GET RAPISTS AND MURDERERS
EVERY DAY BY CALLING A JUDGE.
THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING FOR.
I'M ASKING THAT WE GO THROUGH
AND OBEY THE FOURTH AMENDMENT.
MANY CONSERVATIVES ARGUE THAT
AMENDMENT.
THE SECOND
SOME LIBERALS SAY THEY LOVE TO
BE ABLE TO PROTECT THE FIRST
AMENDMENT.
IF YOU DON'T PROTECT THE ENTIRE
BILL OF RIGHTS, YOU'RE NOT GOING
TO HAVE ANY OF IT.
IF YOU WANT TO PROTECT YOUR
RIGHT TO OWN A GUN, YOU NEED TO
PROTECT YOUR GUN RECORDS FROM
THE GOVERNMENT LOOKING AT YOUR
GUN RECORDS AND FINDING OUT
WHETHER YOU'VE BEEN BUYING A GUN
AT A GUN SHOW.
YOU NEED TO PROTECT YOUR
PRIVACY.
IF YOU WANT TO PROTECT THE FIRST
AMENDMENT, YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT.
IN FACT, WE SPECIFICALLY HAD TO
GO BACK THERE.
THE ORIGINAL PATRIOT ACT SAID
THAT YOU COULDN'T EVEN CONSULT
WITH YOUR ATTORNEY.
YOU COULDN'T EVEN TELL YOUR
ATTORNEY -- YOU WERE GAGGED FROM
TELLING YOUR ATTORNEY.
EVEN KNOW, THOUGH, YOU SAY I
DON'T KNOW IF THEY'VE
INVESTIGATED ME.
YOU KNOW WHY?
BECAUSE THEY TELL YOUR PHONE
COMPANY IF THEY'RE LOOKING AT
YOUR PHONE RECORDS RIGHT NOW OR
YOUR VISA RECORDS, IT'S AGAINST
THE LAW FOR VISA OR THE PHONE
COMPANY TO TELL YOU THAT.
IT'S HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
DOLLARS OF FINES AND JAIL TIME.
IT'S FIVE YEARS IN JAIL IF YOUR
PHONE COMPANY TELLS YOU THEY
HAVE BEEN SPYING ON YOU.
NOW, SOME OF THIS DOESN'T EVEN
GOVERNMENT.
REQUIRE A LETTER FROM
SOME OF IT IS DONE BY THE BANKS.
THE SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY REPORTS,
WE HAVE SIMPLY TOLD THE BANK
HERE, ANYBODY THAT DEALS IN
CASH, ANYBODY THAT HAS OVER A
A $5,000 TRANSFER, WIRE TRANSFER
OR WHO DEALS IN LARGE AMOUNTS OF
MONEY, THE BANK -- IT'S
INCUMBENT UPON THE BANK TO SPY
ON THEIR CUSTOMERS NOW.
THIS IS A REAL PROBLEM, AND I
THINK THAT WE NEED TO HAVE SOME
ARGUMENT AND DEBATE IN OUR
COUNTRY OVER THESE THINGS.
PERMANENTLY.
SOME WANT TO HAVE THESE THINGS
THEY WANT TO PERMANENTLY GIVE UP
THEIR FOURTH AMENDMENT
PROTECTIONS, AND I DISAGREE
STRONGLY.
NOT ONLY WOULD I LET THESE
EXPIRE, BUT I THINK WE REALLY
SHOULD SUNSET THE ENTIRE PATRIOT
ACT AND PROTECT OUR LIBERTIES
THE WAY IT WAS INTENDED BY OUR
FOUNDING FATHERS.
JAMES OTIS WAS AN ATTORNEY IN
BOSTON, AND HE WROTE ABOUT THESE
THINGS THEY CALLED IN THOSE DAYS
WRITS OF ASSISTANCE.
THESE WERE GENERAL WARRANTS.
THE KING WOULD WRITE THEM, OR
ACTUALLY THEY WERE WRITTEN BY
SOLDIERS HERE.
THEY DIDN'T NAME THE PERSON TO
BE SEARCHED OR THE PLACE, AND
THEY WERE USED AS A WAY TO HAVE
THE KING HAVE HIS WAY WITH THE
PEOPLE AND TO BULLY THE PEOPLE.
THE IDEA OF GENERAL WARRANTS IS
WHAT REALLY SORELY OFFENDED OUR
FOUNDING FATHERS.
AMENDMENT.
THAT'S WHY WE GOT THE FOURTH
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT WAS THE
PRODUCT OF A DECADE OR MORE OF
JAMES OTIS ARGUING CASES AGAINST
THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT.
BUT THE QUESTION YOU HAVE TO ASK
YOURSELF WHEN THINKING ABOUT
THESE ISSUES IS IT'S NOT SO
SIMPLE THAT YOU CAN JUST SAY
WELL, I'M EITHER AGAINST
TERRORISM OR I'M GOING TO LET
TERRORISTS RUN WILD AND TAKE
OVER THE COUNTRY.
YOU CAN BE OPPOSED TO
TERRORISTS.
WE CAN GO AFTER TERRORISTS.
WE CAN GO AFTER MURDERERS AND
RAPISTS AND PEOPLE WHO COMMIT
CRIMES, BUT WE CAN DO IT WITH A
PROCESS THAT PROTECTS THE
INNOCENT.
YOU KNOW, WE -- WE LOOKED AT --
I THINK SO FAR THEY SAY WE HAVE
LOOKED AT 28 MILLION ELECTRONIC
RECORDS.
WE HAVE LOOKED AT 1,600,000 TEXT
MESSAGES, AND WE HAVE 800,000
HOURS OF AUDIO.
WE HAVE SO MUCH AUDIO THAT THEY
CAN'T EVEN LISTEN TO IT ALL.
25% OF WHAT THEY HAVE RECORDED
OF YOUR PHONE CONVERSATIONS IS
NOT LISTENED TO BECAUSE THEY
DON'T EVEN HAVE TIME TO LISTEN
TO IT.
MY POINT WOULD BE THAT WE'RE
EAVESDROPPING ON SO MANY PEOPLE
THAT IT COULD BE THAT WE ARE
MISSING OUT AND NOT TARGETING.
IT'S JUST LIKE THE AIRPORTS.
EVERY ONE OF YOU IS BEING
SEARCHED IN THE AIRPORT AND
YOU'RE NOT TERRORISTS AND YOU'RE
NO THREAT TO OUR COUNTRY.
WHY ARE WE NOT LOOKING FOR THE
PEOPLE WHO WOULD ATTACK US AND
SPENDING TIME ON THOSE PEOPLE?
WHY DO WE NOT GO TO A JUDGE AND
SAY THIS PERSON WE SUSPECT OF
DEALING WITH THIS TERRORIST
GROUP, WILL YOU GIVE US A
WARRANT?
WHY DON'T WE HAVE THOSE STEPS?
INSTEAD, WE'RE MINING AND GOING
THROUGH MILLIONS OF RECORDS, AND
I THINK WE'RE OVERWHELMED SO
MUCH WITH THE RECORDS THAT WE
MAY WELL BE DOING LESS OF A GOOD
JOB WITH TERRORISM BECAUSE WE'RE
LOOKING AT EVERYONE'S RECORDS.
BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS I DON'T
WANT TO LIVE IN A COUNTRY WHERE
PRIVACY.
WE GIVE UP OUR FREEDOMS, OUR
I DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN A
COUNTRY THAT LOSES ITS
CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS THAT
PROTECT US AS INDIVIDUALS.
WE DO HAVE A RIGHT TO PRIVACY.
YOU HAVE A RIGHT NOT TO HAVE THE
GOVERNMENT READING YOUR VISA
BILL EVERY MONTH.
WE DO HAVE RIGHTS AND WE SHOULD
PROTECT THESE, BUT WE SHOULDN'T
BE SO FEARFUL THAT WE SAY WELL,
I'M A GOOD PERSON, I DON'T CARE,
JUST LOOK AT MY RECORDS.
IF YOU DO, YOU'RE SETTING
YOURSELF UP FOR A DAY WHEN THERE
WILL BE A TYRANNY, WHEN THERE
WILL BE A DESPOT WHO COMES INTO
POWER IN THE UNITED STATES AND
WHO USES THOSE RULES THAT YOU
SAID OH, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING
TO HIDE.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SOMEONE TAKES
OVER WHO BELIEVES THAT YOUR
RELIGION IS -- IS TO BE
COMBATED, WHO BELIEVES THAT YOUR
POLITICAL BELIEFS AND YOUR
LITERATURE SHOULD BE COMBATED?
COMES?
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THAT DAY
WE CANNOT GIVE UP -- OUR
LIBERTY.
IF WE DO, IF WE TRADE IT FOR
SECURITY, WE'LL HAVE NEITHER.
SO I RISE IN OPPOSITION TO THE
VOTE ON CLOTURE.
I WILL BE INTRODUCING AMENDMENTS
TO THE PATRIOT ACT THIS WEEK,
AND WE WILL BE HAVING A REAL
DEBATE ABOUT HOW WE CAN STOP
TERRORISM BUT ALSO PRESERVE
FREEDOM AT THE SAME TIME.
THANK YOU.
THE
SENATOR FROM IOWA.
I HAVE A UNANIMOUS
CONSENT REQUEST, THAT DALE
ELIASON AND JAMES COOK,
DETAILEES ON MY JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE STAFF, BE GRANTED
FLOOR PRIVILEGES FOR THE
REMAINDER OF THE 112th
CONGRESS.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
I YIELD THE FLOOR.
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM GEORGIA.
MR. PRESIDENT, I
RISE IN SUPPORT OF INVOKING
CLOTURE ON THE MOTION TO PROCEED
TO S. 1038, THE PATRIOT SUNSET
EXTENSION ACT OF 2011.
IN FOUR DAYS ON MAY 27, THREE
FISA PROVISIONS, THE LONE WOLF,
ROVING WIRETAP AND TWO SECTION
315 AUTHORITIES WILL EXPIRE
UNLESS CONGRESS ACTS TO
REAUTHORIZE THEM.
THE HOUSE HAS BEEN WORKING ON A
BILL, H.R. 1800, THAT WOULD MAKE
THE LONE WOLF PROVISION
PERMANENT AND EXTEND THE OTHER
TWO PROVISIONS UNTIL DECEMBER,
2017.
SENATOR FEINSTEIN AND LEAHY HAVE
SPONSORED BILLS THAT WOULD,
AMONG OTHER THINGS, EXTEND ALL
2013.
THREE PROVISIONS UNTIL DECEMBER,
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT 1038 WITH
ITS EXTENSION OF THE THREE
SUNSETS UNTIL JUNE 1, 2015, IS A
REASONABLE COMPROMISE.
ALTHOUGH I BELIEVE THAT EACH ONE
OF THESE TWO SHOULD BE MADE
PERMANENT, THIS BILL WILL ENSURE
THAT OUR INTELLIGENCE
PROFESSIONALS HAVE THE TOOLS
SAFE.
THEY NEED TO KEEP OUR NATION
THERE IS LITTLE DISAGREEMENT
THAT THESE PROVISIONS SHOULD AND
MUST BE REAUTHORIZED.
F.B.I. DIRECTOR ROBERT MUELLER
HAS TESTIFIED REPEATEDLY THAT
EACH ONE OF THESE PROVISIONS IS
IMPORTANT TO BOTH NATIONAL
SECURITY AS WELL AS CRIMINAL
INVESTIGATIONS, BUT THE
IMPORTANCE DOES NOT END THERE.
BECAUSE OF ENHANCED
INFORMATION-SHARING RULES AND
PROCEDURES, OTHER PARTS OF THE
INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY LIKE THE
NATIONAL COUNTERTERRORISM CENTER
AND THE NATIONAL
COUNTERPROLIFERATION CENTER,
OFTEN DEPEND ON THE INFORMATION
COLLECTED UNDER THESE
PROVISIONS.
LOSING OR CHANGING THESE
AUTHORITIES COULD ADVERSELY
IMPACT THE INTELLIGENCE
COMMUNITY'S ABILITY TO ANALYZE
AND SHARE IMPORTANT NATIONAL
INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION.
ACCORDING TO DIRECTOR MUELLER,
WITH ALL THE NEW TECHNOLOGY, IT
IS EASY FOR A TERRORIST TARGET
TO BUY FOUR OR FIVE CELL PHONES,
USE THEM IN QUICK SUCCESSION,
AND THEN DUMP THEM TO AVOID
BEING INTERCEPTED.
HE HAS TESTIFIED THAT THE
ABILITY TO TRACK TERRORISTS WHEN
IMPORTANT.
THEY DO THIS IS TREMENDOUSLY
I COULDN'T AGREE MORE BECAUSE
IT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS THOSE GUYS
ARE UP TO SOMETHING AND IT'S NOT
GOOD.
OUR ENEMIES OFTEN KNOW OUR OWN
LAWS BETTER THAN WE DO.
THEY UNDERSTAND THE HOOPS AND
HURDLES THE GOVERNMENT MUST
CLEAR TO CATCH UP TO OR STAY
AHEAD OF THEM.
KEEP IN MIND THAT THE F.B.I.
CANNOT USE A ROVING WIRETAP
UNTIL A COURT FINDS PROBABLE
CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE TARGET
IS AN AGENT OF A FOREIGN POWER.
SOME CRITICS CLAIM THE PROVISION
ALLOWS THE F.B.I. TO AVOID
MEETING PROBABLE CAUSE AS
PHONE.
SURVEILLANCE MOVES FROM PHONE TO
THIS CLAIM IS SIMPLY NOT
ACCURATE.
AS EVERY ROVING WIRETAP MUST BE
APPROVED BY A FISA COURT JUDGE.
IF A TARGET CHANGES A CELL PHONE
AND THE F.B.I. MOVES TO SURVEIL
A NEW PHONE, THE COURT IS
NOTIFIED OF THAT CHANGE.
ALL OF THE PREBZ -- PROTECTIONS
FOR U.S. PERSON INFORMATION THAT
APPLY TO ANY OTHER FISA WIRETAP
ALSO APPLIES TO ROVING WIRETAPS.
IN SHORT, WHILE THIS AUTHORITY
IS A TREMENDOUS ASSET FOR THE
F.B.I. AND HAS BEEN USED 140
TIMES OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS,
IT POSES NO ADDITIONAL CIVIL
LIBERTIES CONCERNS AND IT SHOULD
BE RENEWED WITHOUT DELAY.
WITH REGARD TO SECTION 215, THE
BUSINESS RECORDS ACT, OVER THE
PAST SEVERAL YEARS, THE RALLYING
CRY AGAINST THE PATRIOT ACT HAS
CENTERED ON SECTION 215, FISA
BUSINESS RECORDS AUTHORITY.
SECTION 215 ALLOWS THE F.B.I. TO
SEEK FISA COURT AUTHORITY TO
OBTAIN BUSINESS RECORDS SUCH AS
HOTEL INFORMATION OR TRAVEL
RECORDS.
AS WITH EACH ONE OF THE EXPIRING
PROVISIONS, THE F.B.I. MUST MEET
THE STATUTORY STANDARD OF PROOF.
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CONDUCTED
SEVERAL AUDITS OF THE F.B.I.'S
USE OF SECTION 215 ORDERS AND
FOUND NO ABUSES OF THE
AUTHORITY.
DIRECTOR MUELLER TESTIFIED THAT
THE BUSINESS RECORDS SOUGHT BY
THE F.B.I. AND TERRORISM
INVESTIGATIONS ARE ABSOLUTELY
ESSENTIAL TO IDENTIFYING OTHER
PERSONS WHO MAY BE INVOLVED IN
TERRORIST ACTIVITIES.
THE LONE WOLF PROVISION, THE
SOLE EXPIRING PROVISION UNDER
THE PATRIOT ACT THAT HAS NOT
BEEN USED BY THE F.B.I.
PROMPTING SOME CRITICS TO DEMAND
ITS REPEAL IS THE LONE WOLF
DEFINITION OF AN AGENT OF A
FOREIGN POWER.
RECENT EVENTS HAVE DEMONSTRATED
THAT SELF-RADICALIZING
INDIVIDUALS WITH NO CLEAR
AFFILIATION TO EXISTING
TERRORIST GROUPS ARE A GROWING
THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY.
THE LONE WOLF PROVISION PROVIDES
A COUNTER TO THAT THREAT, AT
LEAST IN THE CASES OF A NON-U.S.
PERSON WHO IS READILY
IDENTIFIABLE WITH A PARTICULAR
FOREIGN POWER.
THE LONE WOLF PROVISION IS A
NECESSARY TOOL THAT WILL ONLY
CIRCUMSTANCES.
NEED TO BE USED IN LIMITED
IT'S KIND OF LIKE THOSE IN CASE
OF EMERGENCY BREAK GLASS BOXES
THAT COVER CERTAIN FIRE ALARMS
AND EQUIPMENT.
WHILE WE MAY NOT USE IT TOO
MUCH, WE WILL CERTAINLY WISH WE
HAD IT WHEN THE RIGHT SITUATION
COMES UP.
IN CONCLUSION, I AM GRATEFUL FOR
THE LEADERSHIP OF SENATORS REID
AND McCONNELL ON THIS CRUCIAL
PIECE OF LEGISLATION.
THIS BILL WILL ENSURE THAT OUR
INTELLIGENCE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
PROFESSIONALS CAN CONTINUE DOING
WHAT THEY DO BEST, WITHOUT ANY
ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS.
OUR NATION HAS BEEN FORTUNATE TO
HAVE NOT SUFFERED A SEQUEL TO
THE 9/11 ATTACKS, AND MUCH OF
THE CREDIT GOES TO THE DEDICATED
WORK OF OUR INTELLIGENCE AND LAW
ENFORCEMENT PROFESSIONALS.
WE OWE THEM NOT ONLY OUR THANKS
BUT THE RECOGNITION THAT THEIR
JOBS ARE AS DIFFICULT AS IT IS,
AND WE SHOULD NOT BE TAKING ANY
STEPS THAT WILL MAKE THEIR
RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THIS
COUNTRY ANY MORE DIFFICULT.
MR. PRESIDENT, I URGE THE VOTE
IN SUPPORT OF INVOKING CLOTURE
ON THE MOTION TO PROCEED, AND I
YIELD THE FLOOR AND SUGGEST THE
ABSENCE OF A QUORUM.
THE CLERK
WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
TEXAS.
WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
THE CLERK WILL REPORT THE MOTION
TO INVOKE CLOTURE.
CLOTURE MOTION.
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED SENATORS IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS
OF RULE 22 OF THE STANDING RULES
OF THE SENATE, HEREBY MOVE TO
BRING TO A CLOSE THE DEBATE ON
THE MOTION TO PROCEED TO S. 1038
1038, A BILL TO EXTEND EXPIRING
PROVISIONS OF THE U.S.A. PATRIOT
IMPROVEMENT AND REAUTHORIZATION
ACT OF 2005 AND SO FORTH AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES.
SIGNED BY 18 SENATORS.
BY
UNANIMOUS CONSENT, THE MANDATORY
QUORUM CALL HAS BEEN WAIVED.
THE QUESTION IS: IS IT THE SENSE
OF THE SENATE THAT DEBATE ON THE
MOTION TO PROCEED TO S. 1038, A
BILL TO EXTEND THE EXPIRING
PROVISIONS OF THE U.S.A. PATRIOT
IMPROVEMENT AND REAUTHORIZATION
ACT OF 2005, AND THE
INTELLIGENCE REFORM AND
TERRORISM PREVENTION ACT OF
2004, UNTIL JUNE 1, 2015, AND
FOR OTHER PURPOSES, SHALL BE
BROUGHT TO A CLOSE?
THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE MANDATORY
UNDER THE RULE.
THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
VOTE:
VOTE:
VOTE: