By Tim Starks, CQ Staff

Senators Wednesday cleared an overhaul of electronic surveillance rules after easily defeating three amendments aimed at a provision that would effectively wipe out lawsuits against companies allegedly involved in warrantless spying.

President Bush is expected to sign the legislation (HR 6304), ending a three-year congressional debate over his warrantless surveillance program. The measure, however, may be challenged in the courts, and electronic surveillance rules could face changes during next year’s debate over renewal of the 2001 antiterrorism law (PL 107-56), known as the Patriot Act.

The bill, cleared by a 69-28 vote, would grant telecommunications companies immunity if a federal district court determined they received assurances from the government that the program was legal and authorized by the president. According to a Senate Intelligence Committee report, they did receive such assurances.

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama of Illinois voted for the bill, while his former opponent, Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, voted against. Presumptive GOP nominee John McCain did not vote.

The first amendment, offered by Democratic Sens. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut and Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, would strip the bill’s retroactive legal immunity provisions. It fell, 32-66.

“It’s bad enough that Congress abdicated its responsibility to hold the president accountable for breaking the law,” Feingold said. “Now it is trying to absolve those who allegedly participated in his lawlessness.”

The Senate also defeated 37-61 an amendment by Arlen Specter , R-Pa., which stated that the court would not determine whether the government assured the companies the program was legal and authorized, but instead review the constitutionality of the program before the lawsuits could be dismissed.

Specter said his amendment would have ensured court scrutiny of a program on which few members of Congress have been briefed.

“I suggest that this may be a historical embarrassment – a historical embarrassment where we are voting on matters where everybody knows that we don’t know what we’re voting on,” he said.

An amendment offered by Jeff Bingaman , D-N.M., was defeated 42-56. It would have stayed all pending lawsuits until 90 days after Congress receives a report, required by the bill, by inspectors general on the president’s surveillance program.

It would have given Congress a chance to decide on immunity based on a third-party review. If lawmakers took no action within 90 days, the provisions would go into effect.

The administration opposed all three amendments, insisting any provision that jeopardizes or delays retroactive legal immunity threatens future private sector cooperation with spying programs. Administration officials have said Bush would veto any bill including the amendments.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell , D-Ky., said the current immunity provisions represent a bipartisan deal that would speed legislation to Bush’s desk before broad surveillance orders issued under a temporary spying law (PL 110-55) begin to fall away in August.

First posted July 9, 2008 12:21 p.m.