Joe Kennedy III was the only member of the Massachusetts delegation to vote Nay on the Amash Amendment to defund the NSA’s bulk phone data collection program.
The final vote count is here. It was a close one, 205-217, with a majority of Democrats (including almost all progressives) voting to defund the program.
What do you think Kennedy’s reasons are? Is he a actually a national security hawk? Maybe his stint as an assistant DA was reflective of something more than just getting some public service cred? Or is he just willing to go with the White House on anything?
I’d like to know, and I hope he releases a statement.
Please share widely!
Gotta be a security hawk to be viable, sad to say.
Maybe I spend too much time on liberal sites, but I’m getting the sense such positions are subject to increasing public scrutiny, though I confess I have not seen actual polling lately.
But if he is voting like this because he is thinking like that, then I hope he has a very short career.
I suspect he is just following Obama’s wishes, but I still don’t think we know enough about Kennedy. His campaign was all about assumptions and projections put on him because of his name. I wish we had more evidence to support those ideas. Oh well, I still hope we get an explanation from his camp.
“News of the NSA program started a robust public discussion which I believe should continue here in Congress. But … cutting funding for a program intel officials say has stopped potential terrorist attacks on US soil seems premature”
Has he seen evidence supporting that or is he just taking their word?
…exactly how many and what type of terrorist attacks this program has stopped. When the news first broke, an official said that this program is vital, and could stop “the next Boston”. If it’s so good, why did it not stop “the first Boston”?
> Gotta be a security hawk to be viable, sad to say.
Maybe you meant to say that you think he believes this.
But if you think it’s a statement of fact, no.
I don’t want it to be true, and yes we had a dove win on an anti-war platform in 2008 who continued all of the policies he claimed to oppose. The former chairman of the Council of Foreign Rleations admitted that he was a liberal hawk precisely since anti-war voices are shut out of government and viewed with derision. I strongly hope Joe Kennedy had other reasons for his vote, but I suspect he wants to be a Washington player and not just in our delegation. That requires this kind of thinking. I am not excusing this behavior I am just that cynical about the nature of the national security beast on capital hill.
the 94 Republicans and 111 Democrats who voted for the amendment would provide some sort of cover. Also not convinced that a vote for this amendment would come back to haunt him in 5 years or something.
Carl Sciortino posted this to facebook:
And Senator Spilka has taken actions to support her position and words to protect 4th amendment. Good Op-Ed on the issue in MetroWest.