WASHINGTON, July 9, 2008
Dems, GOP Compromise On Surveillance Bill
Bill Would Effectively Shield Telecom Cos. That Aided Government Wiretapping From Civil Lawsuits
-
(CBS/AP)
-
Interactive Domestic Surveillance The debate over the Bush administration's controversial wiretapping program.
The House was expected to pass the bill Friday, potentially ending a monthslong standoff about the rules for government wiretapping inside the United States.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland said the bill "balances the needs of our intelligence community with Americans' civil liberties and provides critical new oversight and accountability requirements."
The issue of legal protection for telecommunications companies that participated in warrantless wiretapping has been the largest sticking point. The Senate passed a bill that immunized them from lawsuits, but the House bill was silent on the matter.
The White House had threatened to veto any bill that did not shield the companies, which tapped lines at the behest of the president and attorney general but without permission from a special court established for that purpose, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. On Thursday, White House spokesman Tony Fratto said the bill met the standards sought by Bush and that the president supported it.
Warrantless wiretapping went on for almost six years until it was revealed by The New York Times. Some 40 lawsuits have been filed against the companies by people and groups who think the government illegally eavesdropped on them.
The compromise bill would have a federal district court review certifications from the attorney general saying the telecommunications companies received presidential orders telling them wiretaps were needed to detect or prevent a terrorist attack. If the paperwork were in order, the judge would dismiss the lawsuit.
Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri, the second-ranking Republican, predicted all the cases would go away.
Under the compromise, the district judge would for the first time be allowed to read the top-secret letters from Bush administration officials - usually the attorney general - to the companies requesting domestic wiretaps without court orders, according to Democratic aides. Each company got around 40 such letters, they said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.
The compromise bill would also require the inspectors general of the Justice Department, Pentagon and intelligence agencies to investigate the wiretapping program to determine both its scope and legality. The report is due in a year.
Those two provisions, immunity and investigation, are meant to balance two competing concerns. Advocates for telecom protection say the companies acted in good faith and that the wiretaps were necessary to avert another terrorist attack. Opponents to immunity say civil lawsuits are the best way to determine whether the Bush administration illegally spied on Americans.
Not all Democrats were falling in line with the compromise. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Sens. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin said they opposed immunity. Feingold called the bill a "capitulation."
"The House and Senate should not be taking up this bill, which effectively guarantees immunity for telecom companies alleged to have participated in the president's illegal program, and which fails to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans at home," Feingold said.
Several privacy and civil rights said Thursday they opposed the bill. The liberal political activist group MoveOn.org was organizing a phone campaign Thursday to pressure House members to defeat it.
Sixty-eight senators were expected to support the compromise, enough to defeat any filibuster attempt. The previous Senate bill, which gave the companies blanket immunity, passed with 67 votes. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, was expected to join that group because the new bill includes a measure she championed making FISA the only legal authority for wiretapping for intelligence purposes.
Rep. Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, the senior Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said passage of the bill by Congress was necessary before August when the first yearlong surveillance orders approved under a previous surveillance regime would run out.
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Amendment bill also would:
The new FISA bill, if it became law, would expire in 2012.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment See all 48 Comments
- Hm, and tell me again in what way the Democrats are working for the people? Yep, just keep voting for them and saying there''s no other choice.
Or you could always vote Green and sleep well. - Reply to this comment
- Imagine that....democRATS actually bucking the Daily Koz wing of their party and doing what''s right - for a change! Where''s AaaBee? She was right. Sometimes gov''t DOES work! :)
- Reply to this comment
- Americans will remember this in November. With very few exceptions, vote against the traitorous incumbents, regardless of party affiliation.
Posted by SgtStedenko
I totally agree--the only reason the Dems keep voting with the Rebugs is because they think Americans don''t know how complicit they have been in all of the Bush lies--we know and Pelosi secured that knowledge when she took impeachment "off" the table--
I certainly hope Obama investigates every single member of the White House, Congress and the Senate and anyone complicit with the Bush "rules" be held accountable---I say OBama, because we know McCain won''t do it. - Reply to this comment
- Everyone wins except Americans!
- Reply to this comment
- The Democrats are going to make sure those rascally Repubs don''''t do anything to inconvenience Al Queda.
Posted by downsteamjim at 08:56 PM : Jun 19, 2008
I think THEY are representing the folks who SENT them to office and the PROBLEM isn''t Al Queda Swastika Breath. THE problem is a Piece of Human Trash that freaks like YOU bestowed upon us... YOU know that creature YOU still call a President. HE broke the LAW and continued to do it for SIX years. But as is the case with all fascist, the actions of the Fuhrer is NEVER to be questioned huh?? Now let''s put on our Hood and Sheet this morning. Let Shooter and the Fuhrer hear ya!! SIEG HEIL MEIN FUHRER!! - Reply to this comment
- "The White House had threatened to veto any bill that did not shield the companies, which tapped lines at the behest of the president and attorney general but without permission from a special court established for that purpose, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. "
Forget protecting Americans, what Bushit is most interested in is protecting his corporate owners.
And what a spectacular give-in by the spineless Dem leadership! Hoyer has got to go. - Reply to this comment
- Under wartime conditions there are extra-judicial actions that are necessary and they will be made by a responsible President in order to preserve the US.
***********************************************
Well, that might work if you have a responsible president. We don''t. - Reply to this comment
- The Democrats are going to make sure those rascally Repubs don''t do anything to inconvenience Al Queda.
- Reply to this comment
- If it did not go through the FISA court then it is by definition illegal and there should be no shield for the telecoms or the SOB Bush.
Posted by SgtRDS-E4
.. .. ..
Incorrect, extreme and immature.
Under wartime conditions there are extra-judicial actions that are necessary and they will be made by a responsible President in order to preserve the US.
Asking for large resource laden companies to provide "Good Samaritan" action to defend the USA and their responding in an immediate fashion is not unusual nor wrong.
But if the people want it to be then so be it.
It is a time tested and reaffirmed value of the USA that is not under any current rethinking.
Posted by bhoogren at 03:13 PM : Jun 19, 2008
We are not at war.
The president was authorized to use force.
Congress did not declare war... - Reply to this comment
- Let me see. The democratic leadership is providing immunity to the telecoms for the violations of our privacy by the government. The Democratic Leadershilp should grow some and quit being dubya''s whipping post.
- Reply to this comment
- I meant to write:
Bush is not the Messiah and
Obama is not the Messiah - Reply to this comment
- Bush is the second coming of Jesus.
Posted by faith_in_w
I don''t know where you get your information.
Bush is not the Messiah any more than Obama is the Messiah. - Reply to this comment
- That would be former Justice Sandra Day O''conner. Scheeeesh
- Reply to this comment
- I''''m not saying that this gov. is demonic and other ones are much better, like China, or Russia. I''''m just saying I do believe another option is possible, as this path we are currently in will only lead to World war III and Apocalypse.
Posted by ttinsly at 03:33 PM : Jun 19, 2008
Former Supreme Court Justice said something the effect that we are on the road toward fascism and we need not to go down that path. - Reply to this comment
- This gap between the actual and immature perception of how this country works is the problem we face as a nation.
It is clear from many of the comments posted here that the powers of the Presidency AND WHY THEY ARE ALLOWED is not in the minds of most of the posters.
This is a function of ignorance - lack of knowledge.
There was considerable debate over these powers before this country was formed. There has been considerable debate over these powers up to this very day.
This information is available to those who hunger for truth and reality. - Reply to this comment
- Absolutely. The FISA court was created for just these types of cases and in an extreme emergency Bush can actually order the wire taps as long as he asks for the warrant within 3 days. He has no excuse and no authority to bypass the courts altogether. Only a king or dictator tries to get away with this crime.
Posted by SgtRDS-E4
.. .. ..
You are immature and ignorant so your childish barracks lawyer prattle is excusable. - Reply to this comment
- Criminal acts cannot be excused because the Government wants to make it easier to violate the Constitution.
Posted by lorinkundert at 03:17 PM : Jun 19, 2008
Absolutely. The FISA court was created for just these types of cases and in an extreme emergency Bush can actually order the wire taps as long as he asks for the warrant within 3 days. He has no excuse and no authority to bypass the courts altogether. Only a king or dictator tries to get away with this crime. - Reply to this comment
- Unless the Constitution expressly permits extrajudicial action, then that power does not exist, see Amendment 10 of the US Constitution.
- Reply to this comment
- If it did not go through the FISA court then it is by definition illegal and there should be no shield for the telecoms or the SOB Bush.
- Reply to this comment
- Congress cannot by ANY means pass an ex post facto law, What was illegal yesterday is still illegal yesterday and what is legal today is still legal today.
Criminal acts cannot be excused because the Government wants to make it easier to violate the Constitution. - Reply to this comment
