Paul vs. The Patriot Act 

Significant portions of the Patriot Act, passed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, expired last night. Unable to overcome objections by Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, the Senate was forced into a rare Sundaysession. The Senate voted 77-to-17 to begin debate on legislation that ends the collection of bulk phone data by the National Security Agency, but permits the government to request the data from telephone companies when needed.

Divisions among conservatives were on display during yesterday's debate. Senator Dan Coats, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, defended the controversial Patriot Act provisions. 

"Unfortunately, there has been such a significant misrepresentation of what this program is. . . some portion of the public is convinced that the government is listening to every phone call they make," Coats said. "It's a bunch of hokum, and it's wrong." 

Senator Coats is correct. Listening to phone calls requires a warrant. The collection of metadata seemed to many to be a relatively unobtrusive way of attempting to identify patterns of terrorist activity. 

Balancing concerns for civil liberties against the demands of national security has been difficult since 9/11. But if we handcuff ourselves and the result is a mass causality event that could have been prevented, there could be a tremendous backlash that results in almost unthinkable restrictions on civil liberties. 

Libertarians should take that into consideration. They may be inadvertently contributing to the very problem they are trying to avoid. 

2016 Update 

Last Wednesday former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum officially declared his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination. The next day former New York Governor George Pataki jumped in. Today South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham announced his bid for the GOP nomination. 

There was movement in the Democratic field too. Saturday former Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley delivered his formal announcement speech. His remarks included this zinger:
 

"Recently, the CEO of Goldman Sachs let his employees know that he'd be just fine with either Bush or Clinton. . . . Well, I've got news for the bullies of Wall Street: The presidency is not a crown to be passed back and forth by you between two royal families."

That's a political two-fer. O'Malley hit both Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton, tying them to the frustration many Americans have with Wall Street and the fear that the 2016 campaign will harken back to the past rather than look ahead to the future. 

Polling shows that Hillary Clinton is so far cruising to the nomination. The latest survey finds that 57% of Democrats support Clinton compared to 15% for Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and 9% for Vice President Joe Biden. Other rivals, including O'Malley, barely registered.

What about the GOP field? The most recent national poll finds five candidates -- yes, five -- leading the pack with just 10% each: Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee, Marco Rubio and Scott Walker. Twenty percent of GOP primary voters remain undecided. 

Of course, the entire country doesn't vote at the same time. So it is important to pay close attention to early primary states like Iowa, where the most recent Hawkeye state poll finds Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker leading with 17%. He is followed by Carson and Paul at 10%, Bush and Huckabee at 9%, Rubio and Santorum at 6% and Ted Cruz at 5%. 

It Must Be Great To Be King 

News broke over the weekend that the Obama Justice Department is working to finalize "more than a dozen new gun-related regulations." Given the propensity of government to overreach, there is already great alarm over the potential for abuse.

But this much is clear: President Barack Obama is again abusing his power to create new law. He is circumventing the legislative process, empowering unelected bureaucrats at the Justice Department and counting on liberal judges to further restrict the Second Amendment right to bear arms. 

Consider this excerpt from The Hill: 
 

"Congressional efforts to expand background checks and keep guns away from dangerous people have failed in recent years, but the legislative defeats won't stop the Justice Department from regulating. The Justice Department's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is looking to revive a rule . . . that would block domestic abusers from owning guns. As proposed, the regulation makes it illegal for some who has been convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence offense to own a gun."

Let me be absolutely clear: No one wants insane people to have firearms. But restrictions on constitutional rights should require public debates and votes by our elected representatives. Such decisions should not be left to the whims of unelected bureaucrats. 

By the way, many on the left who are so gung-ho about limiting the Second Amendment claim that they are motivated to save innocent lives. Yet they are the same people who will fight to the death any regulation of the practice that takes the most innocent human lives and it has nothing to do with guns. It's called abortion. 

If this president and his allies really cared about saving lives, perhaps they should start regulating the abortion industry that claims nearly one million lives a year. 

The Case Against Hastert 

Former Speaker Dennis Hastert was indicted last week on charges of lying to the FBI and structuring cash withdrawals from his own bank account in an attempt to evade financial disclosure requirements. Each charge carries a five-year prison term. 

The charges have nothing to do with Hastert's conduct as an elected official. The Associated Press reports that Hastert was attempting to "conceal claims that [he] sexually molested someone decades ago." 

In recent years we have seen politically motivated prosecutions of former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens and former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. The cases against them were overturned on appeal, but only after both men had been deeply damaged. Recently, former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell was found guilty on charges that higher courts appear skeptical of. 

Now liberal Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz says the Hastert case "smells" of politics and calls it "an abusive prosecutorial discretion." 

The payment structuring charges, Dershowitz said, are meant to combat "money laundering, to prevent drug dealing, to prevent income tax evasion." "Paying hush money is not illegal," he added. Extortion is illegal, yet reports suggest that the person blackmailing Hastert will not face charges. 

I don't know what Hastert did more than 30 years ago. But it seems odd that he is facing criminal charges while Bill Clinton gets $500,000 a speech. 

Beau Biden, RIP 

Former Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, son of Vice President Joe Biden, unexpectedly passed away this weekend at the age of 46. He has been quietly battling brain cancer since 2013. In addition to his political career, Biden served as a major in the Army National Guard and earned the Bronze Star for his service in Iraq.

He is survived by his wife, Hallie, and two young children, Natalie and Hunter.

In a statement, Vice President Biden wrote: "More than his professional accomplishments, Beau measured himself as a husband, father, son and brother. . . Beau embodied my father's saying that a parent knows success when his child turns out better than he did." 

Please join Carol and me in praying for the Biden family during this time of grief and loss.