
Congress, most certainly, will--to use the President's word--``renew'' all expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act.
On the record
Quotes from current and former U.S. state governors.
Current governors
TX-R
KY-D
ND-R
DE-D
NC-D
UT-R
FL-R
OH-R
AK-R
LA-D
WI-D
MT-R
WY-R
AZ-D
NY-D
IN-R
AR-R
WA-D
AL-R
WV-R
KS-D
GA-R
OR-D
CT-D
TN-R
ID-R
NV-R
NM-D
RI-D
SC-R
ME-D
MD-D
NJ-D
CA-D
MO-R
NE-R
CO-D
IL-D
RI-D
MS-R
IA-R
VT-R
PA-D
OK-R
NH-R
MN-D
MI-D
PA-D
VA-RFormer governors

Congress, most certainly, will--to use the President's word--``renew'' all expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act.

I support reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act and I am inclined to support adding investigative authorities, but only if it can be shown that these new authorities are necessary and would not infringe on the constitutional rights of Americans…

Well, then help me understand. You would say, then, that a nondisclosure requirement is not desirable?

I believe the courts have already ruled, have they not, that you have the ability to, for example, if someone puts their trash out on the curb, the courts have ruled you've got no privacy expectation on that; is that correct?

So one of the things here is whether mail should be treated as other things that are put out and once it leaves your zone of privacy.

You say, let's come back and look at it in 4 years, just as we have done on the original parts of the PATRIOT Act.

I think that there are those who oppose the PATRIOT Act or want to see it changed because they accept that.

What is wrong in taking ideas, like an administrative procedures approach--subpoenas approach--and not making the conclusion that the government will set out to violate rights?

I don't really understand why there is no money in the supplemental at all.

Well, I appreciate it. And I--you know, it's just vitally important.

Haiti was understandably recognized, and I quote, 'as a priority fragile state.'

the Iraqis' resolve and standing up and willing to show up in face of danger really did encourage us.

It creates a prosecutorial system that is an unchecked power and is open for exploitation and politically motivated prosecutions.

Our overall ICC policy is consistent with the American Servicemembers' Protection Act, passed by the Congress with strong bipartisan support, which prohibits assistance and support for the ICC.

Not on your life. We're going to go forward with it.

The American people will pay a high cost for freedom.

We believe the Rome Statute establishing the ICC is fundamentally flawed and cannot support it.

Is there anything further that we can do from here to try to bring pressure?