AynRandPaul: Anti-Drone, Pro-Poverty

Yes, the Tribble-Headed One is still a motherfucker.

TPM:

The Senate on Wednesday defeated a Republican-offered measure to drastically cut food stamps.

The amendment to the farm bill, offered by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), was shot down 65-33 in the Democratic-led chamber. It would have slashed $322 billion by placing a cap on Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program spending and handing control to states.

The vote is a reminder of the fiercely ideological nature of today’s Republican Party, particularly when considering the economic bang for the buck food stamps are known to have. The Congressional Budget Office and other nonpartisan studies have found that food stamps provide exceptionally strong stimulative and job-creation value in an under-performing economy.

Paul focused a handful of instances of misuse to make his case for the measure, although his amendment would go much further than targeting abusers.

“We need to remember that recently a woman in Chicago faked the birth of triplets in order to receive $21,000 in food stamps,” he said. “We need to remember that millionaires, including Larry Ficke, who won $2 million, are still receiving food stamps because he says he has got no income. He has got $2 million but no income.”

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) excoriated the legislation.

“Hungry children didn’t cause the recession or the deficit, and cutting food stamps will not solve our debt problem,” he said. “But hungry children don’t have lobbyists, so programs like food stamps end up on the Republican chopping block.”

So that pretty much cancels out any progressive points our teabagger-of-the-one-percenters got for this:

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced legislation on Tuesday that would prohibit law enforcement agencies from using unmanned aerial vehicles to conduct surveillance without a warrant.

“I’m not against technology per se,” he explained on CNN. “What I am for are the constitutional processes that protect our civil liberties. So, you know, it’s not like I’m against the police using cars or against them using airplanes or helicopters or robots. But I am for personal privacy for saying that no policeman will ever do this without asking a judge for permission.”

This year’s Federal Aviation Administration funding bill contained provisions that made it easier for law enforcement agencies to use drones within the United States. The new law requires the FAA to speed up the process by which it authorizes government agencies to operate drones. The law also requires the FAA to allow agencies to operate any drone weighing 4.4 pounds or less as long as it is operated within line of sight, during the day and below 400 feet in altitude.

The American Civil Liberties Union has warned the law could usher in an “era of aerial surveillance.” The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 1980s that the Fourth Amendment did not categorically prohibit warrantless aerial surveillance of private property. The cost of purchasing, operating and maintaining aircraft imposed a natural limit on aerial surveillance. With the advent of drones, however, the ACLU doesn’t see law enforcement agencies being held back by the costs.

“A drone is a very, very powerful way of snooping on behavior,” Paul noted.

His Preserving Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act of 2012 would require the government to obtain a warrant before using drones to conduct surveillance. However, the government would not be required to obtain a warrant to use drones to patrol the national borders, when swift action was necessary to prevent “imminent danger to life,” or if there was determined to be a high risk of a terrorist attack.

“What I would say is that drones can be used if you have a proper warrant,” Paul told CNN. “But that means you go through a judge. A judge has to say there is probable cause of a crime. But I don’t want drones roaming across, crisscrossing our cities and our country snooping on Americans. And that’s the surveillance state that I’m very concerned about. And that’s what our bill would stop.”

If the drones were confined to low-income, non-white neighborhoods, I am sure AynRandPaul would have no problem with them.