3 votes

Unanimous consent... Rand?

Can the Secret Service Tell You To Shut Up?
by Andrew P. Napolitano

Excerpts:
...
Last week, President Obama signed into law the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. This law permits Secret Service agents to designate any place they wish as a place where free speech, association and petition of the government are prohibited. And it permits the Secret Service to make these determinations based on the content of speech.

...

This abominable legislation enjoyed overwhelming support from both political parties in Congress because the establishment loves power, fears dissent and hates inconvenience, and it doesn't give a damn about the Constitution. It passed the Senate by unanimous consent, and only three members of the House voted against it. And the president signed it in secret. It is more typical of contemporary China than America. It is more George III than George Washington.

___________________________

Rand Paul is making a mistake if he thinks this won't come back to bite him. When the first Ron Paul protester gets arrested, they will say that even Rand Paul voted for the bill.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Thats the first thing I

Thats the first thing I thought of when I read the judge's article this morning. I don't understand this. I like rand a lot but I want to see him follow in his dad's example and not compromise at all.

It's a bit overblown but still not a good step

ACLU documented the change pretty well here:

http://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech/how-big-deal-hr-347-cri...

The Secret Service has had the power to designate secure areas temporarily for 40 years. This bill primarily lowers the bar to prosecuting people who trespass that security zone by requiring only that they "knowingly" do so rather than "willfully and knowingly".

The real question is not why so many reps rubberstamped what probably looked like a fairly harmless anti-crime bill to them (hard to imagine any actually read it), but who decided to bring it up now and lower that bar, and what are they afraid of in 2012 that they weren't in 2001 or 2009?

Good points!

Good points!

.

.

Unanimous consent doesn't

Unanimous consent doesn't mean all Senators were present and voted for the bill. It just means there were no objections on the floor in time to prevent it from automatically passing. So we don't know, unfortunately, if he approved it or not, and they did not keep a record of who did.

http://www.dailypaul.com/160981/what-is-unanimous-consent-in...

That's exactly what they did to Rand on the Libya no fly zone. When he started to protest it, the media attacked him by claiming he "voted" for it because it passed by "unanimous consent".

I'm probably going to sound

I'm probably going to sound like an idiot here, but are official records not kept of every vote in congress?

↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓
Show your support for Ron Paul and inspire others at new grassroots site:
http://www.ronpaulpatriotnation.com
( Consider uploading a picture or video of your sign or event, etc .)

Unanimous Consent is note actually a "vote".

It's a procedure by which the time taken for a vote is avoided by simply asking of those present if there are objections. Hearing none, the presiding member declares the motion/amendment/resolution/etc. passed. This is usually and preferably reserved for minor procedural changes or other non-controversial issues, because any member present may, for any reason, voice an objection and force a vote.

My guess is Rand was not present, or the item came to the floor without his staff being aware of it.

*****************************************
Television: Why do you think they call it "programming"?

Thanks for the information!

Thanks for the information!

↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓
Show your support for Ron Paul and inspire others at new grassroots site:
http://www.ronpaulpatriotnation.com
( Consider uploading a picture or video of your sign or event, etc .)

You would think so... They

You would think so... They should be... but no, it seems to be pretty common with these unanimous consent bills. I suppose because it is really just a way to avoid having a real formal vote in the first place. Nice huh?

Govtrack.us says:

"Feb 6, 2012: This bill passed in the Senate with changes by Unanimous Consent. A record of each senator’s position was not kept."

You beat me to it...

...but I wonder if C-Span cameras were on?