Senate Democrats’ decision to let a key surveillance authority lapse comes as they are increasingly emboldened in their legislative fights against President Donald Trump, blocking even traditionally bipartisan bills as they push back against his policies and personnel.

The posture is an escalation from a year ago, when Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer was widely criticized within his party for a spring vote with Republicans to keep the government open. Since then, Democrats have forced government shutdowns, slowed Trump’s nominations and now blocked the bipartisan intelligence law as they seek leverage in a Republican-led Congress.

The risky strategy has consequences when government programs go dark, and Democrats have little to show for it so far in terms of policy victories. Republicans say it is a grave threat to national security to let the surveillance law, which aims to prevent terrorist attacks, expire just as millions of people are entering the United States for World Cup games and as celebrations for the nation’s 250th anniversary get underway.

But the hardball approach has helped unite Democrats inside and outside of the Capitol as they say they have no other choice — and that the blame should fall on Trump for how he is governing.

  • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Pretending to grow a sack as November approaches.

    Still, better than playing possum like they’ve done through both Trump presidencies so far.

  • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    15 hours ago

    The fact that extending 702 is a matter of bipartisan consensus when Trump isn’t president is part of the problem tho

  • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    18 hours ago

    What emboldened them? Before they were blocking bills and then caving when it looked like they might actually get concessions. Have we seen ANY blocking that followed through until it got results yet?

    • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      Yeah, a while back when they caved on funding the entire government they managed to keep the ICE without any new funding. The entire DHS was shut down for 76 days and then FEMA, Coast Guard, etc had funding return but the ICE still had not.

      HOWEVER, GOP still managed to pass new funding 4 days ago with a simple senate majority and House reconciliation. That’s the problem with hardlining is instead we get zero concessions and we still get every single bad thing we tried to stop.

      The only real way to fix this is the give DNC actual power to change things, which they do not have. They have not even had more than 48 senators in over 13 years, that’s why I think things are as bad as they are right now.

    • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Israel’s major export is surveillance technology such as those used at the border. They may as well be tightly interwoven with the private prison industry trying to profit off of these detainees.

  • Dryad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    If democrats can be remembered for being a stumbling block to the onset of fascism, then that’s a success. Sure letting a law with national security implications slip is risky, but so is letting a fascist wield that law against the people.

    • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      letting a law with national security implications slip is risky

      The risk of passing it is far, far greater. The spy agencies are now corrupted by MAGA.

  • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    Very good news. Insane that mass surveillance traditionally had bipartisan support. Could that be starting to change?