More

National Defense Authorization Act: White House Renews Veto Threat After Senate Vote

National Defense Authorization Act

DONNA CASSATA   12/ 2/11 01:44 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — The White House on Friday accused the Democratic-controlled Senate of "political micromanagement" at the expense of national security after it approved legislation requiring military custody of suspected terrorists, even those captured within the U.S., and indefinite detention of some without trial.

In a statement, National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor renewed the White House threat of a presidential veto of the sweeping $662 billion defense bill that includes the far-reaching policy changes on how to handle suspected terrorists. The Senate voted 93-7 Thursday night for the legislation.

Vietor pointed out that counterterrorism experts from Republican and Democratic administrations had said the provisions would restrict the president's authority in the fight against al-Qaida and jeopardize national security.

"By ignoring these non-partisan recommendations, including the recommendations of the secretary of defense, the director of the FBI, the director of national intelligence and the attorney general, the Senate has engaged in political micromanagement at the expense of sensible national security policy," he said.

The Senate bill must be reconciled with a House-passed version in the closing days of the session. The administration opposes provisions in the House bill that would require military commissions for suspected terrorists and limit the president's authority to transfer terrorist suspects from the U.S. naval facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to installations in the United States, even for trial. It also would make it difficult for the administration to move detainees to foreign countries.

Overall, the Senate bill would authorize money for military personnel, weapons systems, national security programs in the Energy Department, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the fiscal year that began Oct. 1. Reflecting a period of austerity and a winding down of decade-old conflicts, the bill is $27 billion less than President Barack Obama requested and $43 billion less than Congress gave the Pentagon this year.

In a resounding vote, the Senate unanimously backed an amendment to impose harsh sanctions on Iran as fears about Tehran developing a nuclear weapon outweighed concerns about driving up oil prices that would hit economically strapped Americans at the gas pump.

"Iran's actions are unacceptable and pose a danger to the United States and the entire world," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

In an escalating fight with the White House, the bill would ramp up the role of the military in handling terror suspects. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and FBI Director Robert Mueller both oppose the provisions as does the White House, which said it cannot accept any legislation that "challenges or constrains the president's authorities to collect intelligence, incapacitate dangerous terrorists and protect the nation."

The bill would require military custody of a suspect deemed to be a member of al-Qaida or its affiliates and involved in plotting or committing attacks on the United States. American citizens would be exempt. The bill does allow the executive branch to waive the authority based on national security and hold a suspect in civilian custody.

The legislation also would deny suspected terrorists, even U.S. citizens seized within the nation's borders, the right to trial and subject them to indefinite detention.

The series of detention provisions challenges citizens' constitutional rights, tests the boundaries of executive and legislative branch authority and sets up a confrontation with the Democratic commander in chief. Civil rights groups fiercely oppose the bill.

"The bill is an historic threat to American citizens and others because it expands and makes permanent the authority of the president to order the military to imprison without charge or trial American citizens," said Christopher Anders, ACLU senior legislative counsel.

The bill reflects the politically charged dispute over whether to treat suspected terrorists as prisoners of war or criminals. The administration insists that the military, law enforcement and intelligence agents need flexibility in prosecuting the war on terror after they've succeeded in killing Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki.

Republicans counter that their efforts are necessary to respond to an evolving, post-Sept. 11 threat, and that Obama has failed to produce a consistent policy on handling terror suspects.

On Iran, Sens. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., and Mark Kirk, R-Ill., had widespread bipartisan support for their amendment, which would target foreign financial institutions that do business with the Central Bank, barring them from opening or maintaining correspondent operations in the United States. It would apply to foreign central banks only for transactions that involve the sale or purchase of petroleum or petroleum products.

The sanctions on petroleum would only apply if the president determines there is a sufficient alternative supply and if the country with jurisdiction over the financial institution has not significantly reduced its purchases of Iranian oil.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON — The White House on Friday accused the Democratic-controlled Senate of "political micromanagement" at the expense of national security after it approved legislation requiring militar...
WASHINGTON — The White House on Friday accused the Democratic-controlled Senate of "political micromanagement" at the expense of national security after it approved legislation requiring militar...
Filed by Luke Johnson  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 93
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
04:24 PM on 12/08/2011
They will put us all in Gitmo.
06:20 PM on 12/07/2011
We need a special election empeachment and reelection of congress by vote of the poeple. The fbi railroads people already but with trial so without trial we have no cival rights at all.
01:40 PM on 12/07/2011
Many of you are as disgusted with this bill as I am. If you truly love your country and YOUR freedom, you need to give the very people who voted for this bill an ear-full and forewarn them that you will NOT vote for anyone stupid enough to pass this bill.

Here is a link that show how each Congressman voted on this ILLEGAL & UNConstitutional bill:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-375
01:07 AM on 12/05/2011
Occupy LA has drafted a letter to President Obama demanding that he veto the National Defense Authorization Act because it destroys the constitutional rights of Habeas Corpus and Due Process. It was signed by members of Occupy LA and will be sent to the White House. Here is the full text of the demand.

"Occupy Los Angeles demands that President Obama veto the National Defense Authorization Act. The legislation includes provisions which destroy the Constitutional rights of Habeas Corpus and Due Process. American citizens and all people everywhere have the inalienable right to contest their imprisonment and to a civilian trial by jury. We reject this and all legislation which abridges these rights as well as the false belief that doing so will make the nation more secure. The bill also contains sanctions against the oil industry and monetary system of Iran which are clear precursors to a military attack. Additionally, the bill funds wars that the majority of Americans oppose. These endless senseless wars only serve the Corporatist interests of the 1% and we oppose this and all legislation which enables and perpetuates them."

You can check out the video here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAQpPOJS91o
photo
eaglespark
"Why waste time learning? Ignorance is quicker."
10:28 PM on 12/03/2011
"The NDAA is deliberately confusing for political purposes but much is at stake. Obama's determination as to whether or not he will veto the problematic 2012 war funding bill will determine how Benjamin Franklin's glib response to the woman waiting outside the Constitutional Convention is ultimately answered. Franklin and other founding fathers had created 'a Republic, Madam, if you can keep it'. But a lawless Military Empire could now await where U.S. 'emergency war powers' trump the Constitution, where the Commander in Chief becomes king for a term(s), the military enters into police state actions in violation of 130 years of Posse Comitatus law, and the Constitution becomes as quaint as the Geneva Conventions were for Alberto Gonzalez and the Bush Administration." --Coleen Rowley, Former FBI Special Agent

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/coleen-rowley/ndaa-military-detainment_b_1126781.html
photo
eaglespark
"Why waste time learning? Ignorance is quicker."
10:12 PM on 12/03/2011
"The broadcast media's ignorance and unwillingness to cover the National Defense Authorization Act, a radical piece of legislation which outrageously redefines the US homeland as a "battlefield" and makes US citizens subject to military apprehension and detainment for life without access to a trial or attorney, is unacceptable...
Anderson Cooper, Brian Williams, Rachel Maddow, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Neil Cavuto and the other handful of household names that mainstream America relies on for news should be talking about this non-stop.
I emailed producers and on-air talent at the three major cable news networks yesterday: not one of them was willing to step up to the plate and report on this appalling legislation, which would give Americans roughly the same protections as citizens in China or Saudi Arabia...
Please, do your jobs. This is the kind of story that wins journalism awards and makes careers. It's the kind of story that makes viewers trust you." --David Seaman
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-medias-blackout-of-the-national-defense-authorization-act-is-shameful-2011-12

UPDATE: "To the mainstream media's credit, Keith Olbermann of Current TV has now mentioned the NDAA's harmful provision, and I've been told that Dylan Ratigan of MSNBC is drawing attention to it as well. A good start, but not nearly enough."
04:03 PM on 12/03/2011
i dont care who supports this bill wether it be democrat, republican,the prez or the pope himself.this bill and the presidents willingness to operate with in its intent is just evil .i hope to god this president vetoes it for the right reasons. you got to figure though alot of these politicions have allready been enritched with with all the insidertrading that happenned when they chose who would stand and who would fall in the banking scandals.maybe the fix is allready in.they have not done anything to go after those crooks.but there more than willing to go after there own citizens
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:36 PM on 12/03/2011
George Orwell should have entitled his book "2011" instead of "1984."
03:46 PM on 12/03/2011
That is what I was thinking!!!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wayne the pain
01:33 PM on 12/03/2011
As a lawyer if it is sent to his desk and he does not veto this Hitleresque legislation he is the phony liberal that many of us suspect him to be!
12:56 PM on 12/03/2011
This process will degenerate into fascism sooner or later. when a government stops selling you "progress" or "growth" as the "American dream" used to, now the government is in the business of selling you protection. We are a nation in bankruptcy and we can only sell you the left over. Protection against some buggy man that was created by the same government.
01:17 PM on 12/03/2011
This congress definately stoped selling us growth when they pased patent reform to the disgust of inventors. IPOs are vanishing with the addition of regressive provisions instead of correcting the 40 methods of stealing inventions from inventors already practiced previously. 1.6 trillion squandered instead of being invested in top marketable invention conception companie to restart recovery.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:05 PM on 12/03/2011
No, American citizens are NOT exempt. Sec. 1032 B (1) simply states military custody is not required. And even that is left open to Presidential discretion under the War Powers Act and the National Security Waiver.

President Obama has sworn to veto the bill if it contained the detention language - good on him!
The problem, however, is that the Senate may have sufficient votes to over ride the Presidential veto. And SCOTUS won't stop it - they've been appointed by the very same government that's shredding the Constitution.

USC 7311 (1) - "An individual may not accept or hold a position in the Government of the United States of the government of the District of Columbia if he (1) advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government..."

By voting for the detention amendment, those Senators are actually breaking federal law.
(And have been for years, but hoping no one would notice.) Not too many people are aware of that. I'm hoping to spread the word. Since SCOTUS won't act, we voters will have to do the job.

Anyone who has actually read the Declaration of Independence can see our government has been doing the same things that caused the revolution against Britain. Will we let this continue?

Please think about it when you vote in 2012.
11:43 AM on 12/03/2011
Harry Reid, were you sleeping again? Any decent leader makes sure this never gets to a vote until he has the numbers.
01:31 PM on 12/07/2011
sixx...Harry Reid is the one who is stopping any vote, to amendments.
10:54 AM on 12/03/2011
This bill is chilling pure evil in its present form. Without sufficient evidence it allows detention without hearing or trial. This is a open invitation for political supression and intimidation not associated with terrorism at all. By making false accusations individules with alterior motives can have others arrested and detained indefinately. Extortionists and thieves and rumor spreaders can form conspitracies to incarcerate upstanding citizens instead of there own justified incarcerations
09:48 AM on 12/03/2011
..

Too bad we all know that this is just the latest O campaign gimmick...
.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
teapartysuxkoch
02:18 AM on 12/03/2011
The biggest threat to our freedom and our country is our government...voted in favor 93/7. Ten years of war and there is no stopping it, Iran will be next. If anyone thinks any president (including candidate Ron Paul) can stop these wars, bullshit. Those within our government will never allow any president to end the wars. 10 years of war, not to protect our freedom, but all for oil/war contractors. Our government works for the 1% because they are paid to do so. Just keep throwing out the words terrorism and terrorists to justify your greed.