The House of Representatives are debating whether the Amash Amendment should be passed.  Though the Obama Administration welcomed the debate, it was urging the lawmakers not to pass it since it sees the amendment as something that would cripple the security of US.

The Amash Amendment was proposed by Representative Justin Amash, a Michigan Republican, and it aims limit the National Security Agency’s funds used to collect data on telephone calls made by U.S. citizens unless a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order stipulates that the records pertain to an individual under investigation.  Sadly, the amendment did not get enough votes.

House votes, Political rhetoric

The House voted 217 to 205, in favor of not passing the amendment.  The amendment got bipartisan support with 111 Democrats and 94 Republicans voting in its favor.  While 83 Democrats and 134 Republicans voted no.  Six Republicans and six Democrats did not cast their votes.  The amendment needed 212 votes for it to be passed.

Before the votes were cast, the floor was open for representatives to present their arguments as to why the amendment should or should not be passed.

Those not in favor of the amendment played the terrorist card, reminding those who are voting why the government is spying on its people – to protect them.

“Have 12 years gone by and our memories faded so badly that we forgot what happened on Sept. 11?” Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., chairman of the Intelligence Committee, said in pleading with his colleagues to back the program during House debate.

House arguments carry over from Bush administration

SiliconANGLE Founding Editor Mark “Rizzn” Hopkins commented that “this is the kind of rhetoric you’d expect in a debate like this.  The NSA’s wide sweeping powers,  as well as many of the alphabet soup organizations, use 9/11 to justify their desire to surveil Americans and non-Americans alike.  It is difficult to use any event as a justification for creeping amounts of surveillance by a country.”

As for those in favor of the amendment, they were arguing that it’s time that the government give privacy back to the Americans.

“Opponents of this amendment will use the same tactic that every government throughout history has used to justify its violation of rights: Fear,” Amash said. “They’ll tell you that the government must violate the rights of the American people to protect us against those who hate our freedom.”

Hopkins stated that this kind of rhetoric is very familiar for those who are politically aware, since this type of argument was very common during the Bush Administration.  He added that some were using these tactics to justify their arguments and to empower the government to do whatever it wants.

So what does the result of this vote mean?  Will the amendment soon be forgotten or will this just spark more lawmakers to create their own amendments in the hopes that one will finally get approved and privacy be restored to the American people?

For more of Hopkin’s Breaking Analysis, check out the NewsDesk video below: