Speaker John BoehnerJohn BoehnerFormer House leader Bob Michel, a person and politician for the ages Former House GOP leader Bob Michel dies at 93 Keystone pipeline builder signs lobbyist MORE (R-Ohio) on Thursday explained his decision to allow a vote on an NSA amendment he strongly opposed, saying he felt “very strongly that Congress couldn’t just avoid the debate” over the government’s surveillance programs.
The House on Wednesday narrowly defeated a measure by Rep. Justin AmashJustin AmashCongress must reform civil asset forfeiture laws A guide to the committees: House GOP rep pushes back on Trump's tweet about town hall protests MORE (R-Mich.) that would have curtailed the National Security Agency’s spying activities, as BoehnerJohn BoehnerFormer House leader Bob Michel, a person and politician for the ages Former House GOP leader Bob Michel dies at 93 Keystone pipeline builder signs lobbyist MORE cast a rare vote against it.
Boehner also held up the 205-217 vote as an example of his stewardship of the House, where he has vowed to allow the chamber to “work its will.”
“I also felt very strongly that Congress couldn’t just avoid the debate,” he said. “Members wanted to have this debate. You all know I believe in a more open process, and I wanted the House to have this debate. We did. The amendment was defeated. I’m proud of my colleagues who stood up for what I think they believe was a program that really is working to help protect the American people.”
The amendment split both Republicans and Democrats, creating an unusual instance in which Boehner, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and archconservative Rep. Michele BachmannMichele Bachmann'Real Housewives' producer 'begging' Conway to join cast Ex-rep admires furs amid PETA inaugural gala Why Republicans took aim at an ethics watchdog MORE (R-Minn.) all voted together in opposition.
While the measure failed, Boehner’s office blamed the White House for allowing it to come so close to passing.
The vote was “closer than it should have been,” Boehner spokesman Brendan Buck said. “That’s because the president continues to demonstrate a troubling reluctance to sufficiently defend this program. Like it or not, it is the president’s responsibility to explain — regularly and repeatedly if needed — the program’s focus, scope and necessity to the American people.
“Hopefully this vote will serve as a wake-up call to the White House,” Buck added in an email to reporters. “Hopefully the president will now consider making a real, consistent effort to explain what would be at risk if this type of national security program went away. This is an obligation the president has and one only he can fulfill.”