As a mere Englishman, I'm not quite sure what "table" means in this context. My guess is that it means "put it on the agenda", i.e. fix a time to discuss it later, but that doesn't look right here, because you are saying that the amendments were rejected. Ken Brown Declan McCullagh wrote:
At 09:20 PM 10/11/01 -0700, Steve Schear wrote:
Ah, I tuned in late and only caught the last one.
Yeah. The sequence went as follows, starting at 9 pm: 1. Feingold introduced amendment to the USA Act 2. Feingold, Wellstone, Cantwell spoke in favor of it 3. Just about everyone else led by Hatch, Leahy, Daschle opposed it 4. Daschle moved to table 5. Everyone voted to table 6. Goto Line 1
The votes were: 83-13 to table the trespasser snooping amendment 90-7 to table roving wiretap limits 89-8 to table subpoena limits
Feingold did a reasonable enough job, but he did wimp out and not introduce the "secret search ban" amendment. Would have been good to have some debate on that. Debate ended around midnight.
-Declan