Also, you’re right, everybody wants it. Is there really any question as to whether or not the Democrats want to protect Americans? To suggest otherwise is asinine.

What I was getting at, in a nutshell, is that Republicans are asking for the more authoritarian version which cuts courts out of the process altogether while claiming that it is the *only* way to get the necessary information when our intelligence agencies need it. What they’re ignoring is that the bill already provides for that when the need is urgent enough (though, I concede, I’m not aware of what is or is not considered “urgent enough” according to the bill). It already takes care of that, but still protects Joe Q. American from being spied upon for no good reason. The last thing I’d want is an approved FOIA request on my personal conversations or download history.

Another problem with what the GOP wants is the utter lack of checks and balances that would occur without court supervision. Obviously, the GOP has been used to this from, arguably, 1998 to the beginning of 2007. There’s Congressional majority, the White House, the stacking of Supreme Court justices, the blatant politicizing of the Justice Department, all of whom worked together effortlessly with no oversight. We’re seeing the fruition of this as the Attorney General of the United States refuses to enforce mandated Congressional subpoenas and contempt charges, all because the President, who appointed him, claimed yet another so-called Executive Privilege.

Our government should not run like this. I hope that if a Democrat takes the White House next year that they’ll abide by this fundamental standard. If nothing else, it’ll help the GOP save face for not having to hypocritically decry them for doing the same thing that Republicans have been doing for the past seven years. Hopefully, it results in a balance of powers to stave off, at least temporarily, the inevitable collapse that all democracies suffer.