CQ TODAY PRINT EDITION
– INTELLIGENCE
July 7, 2008 – 7:13 p.m.
Senate Likely to Clear Wiretap Overhaul This Week Over Liberal Opposition
By Tim Starks, CQ Staff
Despite a liberal campaign to sway votes against a White House-backed overhaul of electronic surveillance rules, the Senate is almost certain later this week to clear the bill as it is currently written.
Majority Leader Harry Reid , D-Nev., said that debate on the bill would begin Tuesday but that the vote would be put off until Wednesday to allow senators to attend the Tuesday funeral of Republican Sen. Jesse Helms in Raleigh, N.C.
The delay was not expected to affect the outcome of the vote, despite the last-ditch effort by liberals to stall legislative action.
Their campaign began just before the Fourth of July recess, when Democrats Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut resisted attempts to quickly pass the bill (
Since then, liberals have launched an effort to persuade presumed Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois to reverse his support of the bill, a rewrite of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA (PL 95-511).
At the same time, the American Civil Liberties Union has joined forces with libertarians and others to persuade senators to vote against the legislation. Another civil liberties group, the Center for Democracy and Technology, is arguing that the bill could give more spying authority to the executive branch than senators realize.
Meanwhile, progressive bloggers also have raised money online to buy advertisements criticizing supporters of the bill.
But with the Senate voting 80-15 on June 25 to limit debate on a motion to proceed to the legislation, the odds against the bill’s opponents are long. Republicans have almost unanimously supported the bill, which passed the House on June 20 by a vote of 293-129. An earlier version of the bill (
Amendments Expected to Fail
Although there are three amendments slated for debate that modify or strip the legislation’s most contentious provision — the effective wiping out of lawsuits against companies being sued for assisting President Bush’s warrantless surveillance program — they are all likely to fail.
One, an amendment by Feingold and Dodd to strip the bill’s immunity provisions, fell short of a majority vote the last time it came up, 31-67.
The other two amendments could win more votes. But under an agreement between Democratic and Republican leaders, they would need 60 votes for adoption, essentially guaranteeing their failure.
One, by Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, would require the lawsuits’ dismissal unless a federal district court concludes that the assistance from the telephone companies “was provided in connection with an intelligence activity that violated the Constitution of the United States.”
Senate Likely to Clear Wiretap Overhaul This Week Over Liberal Opposition
Another, by Jeff Bingaman , D-N.M., would stay all pending lawsuits until 90 days after Congress receives the inspector general report on the president’s surveillance program required by the legislation.
The idea is to give Congress a chance to decide on immunity based on a third-party review, and if lawmakers took no action in 90 days, the bill’s immunity provisions would go into effect. The Bush administration threatened on Monday to veto the bill if it includes the Bingaman amendment.
Jane Hamsher, a progressive blogger at firedoglake.com, said the ad campaign against supporters of the new FISA bill has “forced members of the House and Senate to confront the degree to which their constituents are really unhappy about what they are doing.”
Mike Stark, who helped organize the campaign against the FISA bill on Obama’s Web site for supporters, my.barackobama.com, last week urged Obama to attend the Senate debate over the bill and to argue for the adoption of amendments that would remove the immunity provisions.
The Obama campaign has not said whether the senator will attend the Senate debate, but Obama said in a statement on his Web site that while it was not an easy decision to back the bill, he believed it was sound.
“I know that the FISA bill that passed the House is far from perfect,” he wrote. “But I also believe that the compromise bill is far better than the Protect America Act that I voted against last year.”
Concerns Over Expanded Authority
Although the immunity provision has provoked much ire among liberals, civil libertarians are particularly concerned about the spying authority that the bill would provide the executive branch.
It would allow warrantless surveillance of foreign targets, even those who may be communicating with people in the United States. Warrantless surveillance could begin after the secret FISA court evaluates executive surveillance procedures, although surveillance could begin earlier if the administration declares urgent circumstances.
Jim Dempsey, the public policy director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, has argued that the bill could allow massive collection of the communications of U.S. citizens. Where there is ambiguity in the law, he argued, the executive branch would have leeway to interpret it.
But congressional aides disputed Dempsey’s arguments, countering that the legislation would not permit the “wholesale” collection of information.
Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office for the ACLU, said the fight would continue even if the legislation succeeds.
She said the ACLU would look at legal challenges to the bill as well as legislative attempts to unravel the bill’s objectionable portions when the new Congress begins in 2009. The bill would sunset at the beginning of 2013.
Comments
Why is being presented as a 'liberal' agenda? It is NOT and such is evidenced by the backing of NO IMMUNITY by the League of Women Voters; either do some decent reporting or just shut up.
POST A COMMENT
Oops! The following errors must be addressed: