Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Senate Authorizes Broad Expansion of Surveillance Act

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Senate Authorizes Broad Expansion of Surveillance Act

    Bush Urges House to Pass Measure 'Immediately'

    By Paul Kane
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Wednesday, February 13, 2008; 9:53 AM

    The Senate yesterday approved a sweeping measure that would expand the government's clandestine surveillance powers, delivering a key victory to the White House by approving immunity from lawsuits for telecommunications companies that cooperated with intelligence agencies in domestic spying after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

    On a 68 to 29 vote, the Senate approved the reauthorization of a law that would give the government greater powers to eavesdrop in terrorism and intelligence cases without obtaining warrants from a secret court.

    The Senate's action, days before a temporary surveillance law expires Friday, sets up a clash with House Democrats, who have previously approved legislation that does not contain immunity for the telecommunications industry. The chambers have been locked in a standoff over the immunity provision since the House vote Nov. 15, with President Bush demanding the protection for the industry.

    House leaders vowed again yesterday to oppose the telecom immunity provision until the White House releases more information about the controversial warrantless surveillance program it initiated shortly after the terrorist attacks. But Bush appeared before reporters this morning to applaud the Senate bill and warn House Democrats that he would not agree to any more extensions or temporary measures.

    "The time for debate is over," Bush said, noting that the Senate version of the bill has drawn some bipartisan support in the House and urging lawmakers to pass it immediately.

    "The lives of countless Americans depend on our ability to monitor these communications," Bush said. "We must be able to find out who the terrorists are talking to, what they are saying and what they are planning."

    The House and Senate bills both include major revisions to the 30-year-old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which established a secret court to issue warrants for domestic spying on suspects in terrorism and intelligence cases. The National Security Agency, however, secretly bypassed the court for years as it obtained information from telecommunication companies, until media reports revealed the arrangement.

    The most important change approved by the Senate yesterday would make permanent a law approved last August that expanded the government's authority to intercept -- without a court order -- the phone calls and e-mails of people in the United States communicating with others overseas. U.S. intelligence agencies previously had broad leeway to monitor the communications of foreign terrorism suspects but needed warrants to monitor calls intercepted in the United States, regardless of where they originated.

    The House and Senate versions of the new FISA provisions differ slightly, but leaders on both sides acknowledged that the major stumbling block is immunity for the telecommunications industry, which faces dozens of lawsuits for providing personal information to intelligence agencies without warrants.

    Senate Democrats' split on immunity echoes past party divisions over national security issues, including how strongly to confront Bush on the tools the administration uses to target suspected terrorists and their allies.

    "This is the right way to go, in terms of the security of the nation," said Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), chairman of the intelligence committee, which wrote the Senate bill.

    Rockefeller was one of 17 Democrats who joined 49 Republicans and one independent to reject an amendment offered by Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) that would have stripped the immunity provision from the bill.

    Two-thirds of the Democratic caucus opposed immunity. "It is inconceivable that any telephone companies that allegedly cooperated with the administration's warrantless wiretapping program did not know what their obligations were. And it is just as implausible that those companies believed they were entitled to simply assume the lawfulness of a government request for assistance," said Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.), who co-sponsored the amendment.

    Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), who is locked in a tight race with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) for the Democratic presidential nomination, opposed immunity for the industry, along with the entire elected Democratic leadership team. Clinton, who has publicly opposed immunity in the past, was campaigning during yesterday's primaries and did not attend the vote.

    Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the front-runner for the GOP nomination, supported the overall bill and the immunity provision. Neither Clinton nor Obama was on hand for the vote on final passage of the bill. McCain was.

    Congressional leaders have until Friday -- when a two-week extension of the temporary law that authorizes expanded surveillance powers expires -- to iron out differences between the House and Senate versions. House Democratic leaders introduced a bill for another 21-day extension of the law, the Protect America Act, to provide sufficient time.

    Republican leaders in both chambers have pushed for passage of the Senate bill without a House-Senate conference.

    "I don't think there's a need to do a conference. This bill has been vetted and vetted and vetted," said Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), the Republican whip.

    Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), the ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, warned Democrats not to expect a softening of the administration's position.

    "I think the Democrats would be making a mistake if they felt the president was not going to be serious about vetoing any further extension or insisting that the immunity provisions be in there," Smith said.

    But House Democratic leaders continued pushing for more information about the warrantless spying that telephone companies aided after the 2001 attacks.

    Available documents on the program "raise important questions, and it will take some time to gather enough information to make a determination on the issue of retroactive immunity," House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Tex.) said yesterday.

    Staff writers Michael Abramowitz and Debbi Wilgoren and washingtonpost.com staff writer Ben Pershing contributed to this report.

  • #2
    Why didn't the other 1/3 of the democrats oppose this?? Are they traitors?? I suppose they know this is actually good for national security. These survelliances are done by mostly by computer, George Bush isnt sitting behind his desk listening to our personal conversations. Just dont plan terrorist attacks against our country and you wont have any thing to worry about. If a little freedom has to be sacrificed so be it, the government already uses video surveillance at Banks and traffic areas. Is that Warrantless Spying???? Love how the terms like spying are thrown around, if this were in effect under Clinton would we still use this term. No, Bush is bad and Clinton is great. Put any president in a post 9-11 world and they would be using the same means to gather the intel for the security of its people.
    NBA is a joke

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by flarendep1
      Why didn't the other 1/3 of the democrats oppose this?? Are they traitors?? I suppose they know this is actually good for national security. These survelliances are done by mostly by computer, George Bush isnt sitting behind his desk listening to our personal conversations. Just dont plan terrorist attacks against our country and you wont have any thing to worry about. If a little freedom has to be sacrificed so be it, the government already uses video surveillance at Banks and traffic areas. Is that Warrantless Spying???? Love how the terms like spying are thrown around, if this were in effect under Clinton would we still use this term. No, Bush is bad and Clinton is great. Put any president in a post 9-11 world and they would be using the same means to gather the intel for the security of its people.


      Give anyone too much power and it will be abused!

      The secret Courts are what this is for and should continue to be used in that way.

      Comment


      • #4
        This makes me sick. I will not give up any of my freedoms, so we can be safer. Isn't that a big reason why we fight-for our freedoms? If I trusted the gov at all this would be fine, but give them an inch, and they take a mile.
        "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." -Mark Twain

        Comment


        • #5
          Grandma, its too late, like I said video survellance is here. Cops in our state have installed video speed traps, take your picture and send you a ticket. Many of these videos are important in identifying lawbreakers but where to draw the line. In the UK you cant walk down the street without being on camera. Its coming here too. Its not a Bush thing or a Democrat issue, its governemnt vs the people. This is why you all should be against any government expansion!! Government healthcare will give up freedom, just another example.
          NBA is a joke

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by flarendep1
            Grandma, its too late, like I said video survellance is here. Cops in our state have installed video speed traps, take your picture and send you a ticket. Many of these videos are important in identifying lawbreakers but where to draw the line. In the UK you cant walk down the street without being on camera. Its coming here too. Its not a Bush thing or a Democrat issue, its governemnt vs the people. This is why you all should be against any government expansion!! Government healthcare will give up freedom, just another example.
            Government Healthcare I believe is for the 46+ million unisured that can't afford it.

            Read This:

            http://www.bettorschat.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=142513

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by BettorsChat
              Government Healthcare I believe is for the 46+ million unisured that can't afford it.

              Read This:

              http://www.bettorschat.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=142513


              I read it and believe government healthcare would be inundated with fraud and would bankrupt us.
              NBA is a joke

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by flarendep1
                I read it and believe government healthcare would be inundated with fraud and would bankrupt us.
                Amen. The Gov't can't run small programs efficiently and effectively. What do you think a multi, multi billion dollar program will look like in a couple of years?
                "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have..." Thomas Jefferson

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by flarendep1
                  I read it and believe government healthcare would be inundated with fraud and would bankrupt us.
                  Gee, I wonder why other Countries much smaller than us that have Universal Health Care aren't broke like us.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    ironic how the bill expired during an election year. If this vote was 2 years ago or next year there is no way it would pass. Dems just don't want to look weak on national security during an election year. Very weak.
                    "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." -Mark Twain

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Right on Grandma, Dems could have stopped it but were afraid of the backlash. Politicians JOB = RE-ELECTION
                      NBA is a joke

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X