| January 24, 2008 | by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Satyam Khanna, Matt Corley, and Ali Frick Contact Us | Tell-a-Friend | Archives | Permalink |
Bush Resumes Quest For Unchecked Powers
In August, Congress capitulated to pressure from the Bush administration and passed the Protect America Act, which temporarily revised the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) by expanding the administration's surveillance powers while gutting congressional and judicial oversight. The law, which contained a sunset provision, is set to expire on Feb. 1. Last fall, Congress began the process of re-working the legislation, aiming to maintain the needed updates to the FISA law while correcting "the most glaring deficiencies of the Protect America Act." At the same time, the White House insisted that it be given "the power to grant legal immunity to telecommunications companies" that violate privacy laws by cooperating with the administration's warrantless eavesdropping program, a provision that seriously worries civil liberties advocates. In November, the House passed the RESTORE Act, which did not include immunity. But the Senate was unable to reconcile legislation passed by the Senate Intelligence Committee that contained immunity with a Senate Judiciary bill that did not. Facing a filibuster threat from Sens. Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Russ Feingold (D-WI), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) withdrew the FISA legislation from consideration before the winter break, planning to return to it this month. Yesterday, the Senate returned to the issue, again facing differences over "whether to grant legal immunity to telephone companies."
AMNESTY FOR POTENTIAL CRIMES: In a speech to the conservative Heritage Foundation yesterday, Vice President Dick Cheney argued that the administration's push for retroactive immunity is based on the "important principle" that "those who assist the government in tracking terrorists should not be punished with lawsuits." In reality though, the immunity "would reward those who knowingly broke the law and would undermine the critical role played by service providers in ensuring that the government presents the required documentation before being given access to intercepted communications." Additionally, as Feingold pointed out, "existing law already immunizes telephone companies that respond in good faith to a government request, as long as that request meets certain clearly spelled-out statutory requirements." "It's not as if these companies don't have lawyers to tell them what's legal and what's not," he wrote on the site DailyKos.com. If Congress does allow retroactive immunity, it will not only encourage a potential repetition of the illegal eavesdropping that took place after 9/11, but it would also protect the administration itself from facing repercussions for ordering the warrantless program by forcing dismissals of pending lawsuits that could reveal the truth of what took place.
FEARMONGERING FOR IMMUNITY: With the expiration of the temporary surveillance bill looming, Reid sought a temporary extension this week in order to avoid "political gamesmanship" while completing the bill, but Senate conservatives and the White House objected and went on the attack. "To stall legislation needed to help our intelligence community prevent attacks and protect American lives is not only irresponsible, it's also dangerous," said Sen. Kit Bond (R-MO), the ranking Republican on the Intelligence Committee. Without the immediate passage of permanent legislation, "terrorists" will soon "be free to make phone calls without fear of being surveilled by U.S. intelligence agencies," threatened White House spokesman Tony Fratto last week. "With the day of reckoning so close at hand, we're reminding Congress that they must act now," said Cheney in his speech yesterday. "Liability protection, retroactive to 9/11, is the right thing to do. It's the right way to help us prevent another 9/11 down the road," he added.
MORE TO WORRY ABOUT THAN IMMUNITY: The RESTORE Act passed by the House in November ably balanced national security with civil liberties by giving "the government the powers it says it needs to intercept terrorist communications without issuing a fishing license to spy on innocent Americans." But the Senate Intelligence bill, which the White House is pushing as the only bill it will accept, does not provide the proper protections for the privacy of Americans. In the bill, the government is allowed "to acquire communications between foreigners and Americans inside the United States, without a court order" as long as the foreigner is outside the country and "the purpose is to obtain foreign intelligence information," a term with "an extremely broad definition." In the entire process of reforming FISA, the administration has shown outright contempt for oversight by the legislative and judicial branches. The Senate Judiciary bill gives the secret FISA court "authority to assess the government's compliance with its wiretapping procedures, to place limits on the use of information that was acquired through unlawful procedures, and to enforce its own orders." The Senate Intelligence bill does not provide any such authority. If the Judiciary bill is shot down by the full Senate, senators are expected to offer amendments to try to improve the oversight measures of the Intelligence Committee bill.
No comments:
Post a Comment