|
House Version of Domestic Surveillance Bill Passes 213-197
 Bush will veto this version. There is no retroactive protection for the telecoms. Lawyers and terrorists win!
| Won't get past the Senate. We'll be doing this again in two weeks. Article EFL to the new stuff as we have an article from earlier today. |
The House on Friday narrowly approved a Democratic bill that would set rules for the government's eavesdropping on phone calls and e-mails inside the United States.
The bill, approved as lawmakers departed for a two-week break, faces a veto threat from President Bush. The margin of House approval was 213 to 197, largely along party lines.
Because of the promised veto, "this vote has no impact at all," said Republican Whip Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri.
The president's main objection is that the bill does not protect from lawsuits the telecommunications companies that allowed the government to eavesdrop on their customers without a court's permission after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
The vote sent the bill to the Senate, which has passed its own version that includes the legal immunity for telecom companies that Bush is insisting on. Without that provision, House Republicans said, the companies won't cooperate with U.S. intelligence.
"We cannot conduct foreign surveillance without them. But if we continue to subject them to billion-dollar lawsuits, we risk losing their cooperation in the future," said Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas.
The government does have the power to compel telecommunications companies to cooperate with wiretaps if it gets warrants from a secret court. The government apparently did not get such warrants before initiating the post-9/11 wiretaps, which are the basis for the lawsuits.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, said the bill is meant to fix that. It would let a judge determine whether lawsuits should be dismissed, rather than having Congress make that decision.
| Because a judge knows more than the President, National Security Council, Director of Central Intelligence, the NSA and the intel leaders of Congress. Stands to reason. |
"I believe that the nation is deeply concerned about what has gone on for the last seven years, and I want to restore some of the trust in the intelligence community," Reyes said.
| Frankly Silvestre, the nation doesn't give a rip just as long as it's protected from the bad guys. If bad guys stage another 9/11 and we figure out that we would have known about it, if only we could have listened in, your party will never win another election. |
Democrats argued against quashing the lawsuits without knowing in detail why the immunity is necessary. Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., said the government may have as many as five ongoing clandestine surveillance programs. "Congress is not fully informed, and it would be reckless to grant retroactive immunity without knowing the scope of programs out there," Harman said.
| Congress is as informed as it wants to be. The House and Senate Intel committees can dig as deep as they want, and Harman should know that since she's been there. |
"All members of Congress should see those documents so they could see the breadth and scope" of the wiretapping program, said Rep. John Tierney, D-Mass.
| And share them with the New York Times. |
The Democratic bill also would initiate a yearlong bipartisan panel modeled after the 9/11 Commission to investigate the administration's so-called warrantless wiretapping program.
| Just what we need, another investigation. |
Posted by: Harry Reid 2008-03-14 |
