With the substantial majority vote on the legislation in the House as well as the Senate, I am puzzled by the motivations of the members of Congress. Unlike a lot of people, I don't regard our elected officials as craven, spineless, fools. Indeed, Democrats and Republicans are for the most part very hard working, and easily as smart as the rest of us, if not moreso. And I don't regard the past election as much of a "mandate" as the author appears to believe. The Senate is 49-49, and the House is seperated by a few dozen votes. It seems like something else is going on here - perhaps the Congressmen know more than the author about the specific threats facing our country and honestly believe that this legislation would be helpful. It also may be that the critics of this program, such as the author, have been so shrill in spreading hysteria about the erosion of civil liberties, that it has become hard to believe that the program is fundamentally sound - and made moreso by the legislation just passed and signed by the President. I have seen this sort of rhetoric over and over - about the "spinelessness of the political class" - always from folks who set themselves up as critics and who bear little responsibility for their views, unlike a member of Congress. Report a

So you are in favor of letting the executive branch police itself, instead of having congressional oversight? This is certainly a vote for expanded executive power.... I mean, if you're ok with that...

After reading this article, I was disappointed to learn that one of my senators (Ms. Feinstein) voted "yes" to this bill.

But she also provided a statement explaining her vote.

Now I'd like to dig into whose bill got proposed first, who was stalling, etc. This is the kind of decision-making atmosphere that is really effective at killing off sensible debate.

"critics and who bear little responsibility for their views, unlike a member of Congress.'

With all due respect, few people bear less responsbility for their views than members of Congress. In theory, this protects them and allows them to do the "right thing." In theory. Of course, our founding fathers would be aghast at our current party system...

aghast you say...huum...you speaking the the founding brothers again are ya?