Senate OKs New Rules on Eavesdropping

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Senate OKs New Rules on Eavesdropping stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

PAMELA HESS | February 12, 2008 11:28 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nev. right, looks on as Senator Christopher Bond, R-Mo., discusses Senate action on the Foreign intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), Tuesday, Feb. 12,2008, during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Dennis Cook)

WASHINGTON — The Senate on Tuesday approved new rules for government eavesdropping on phone calls and e-mails, giving the White House much of the latitude it wanted and granting legal immunity to telecommunications companies that helped in the snooping after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Protection for the telecom companies is the most prominent feature of the legislation, something President Bush had insisted on as essential to getting private sector cooperation in spying on foreign terrorists and other targets. The bill would give retroactive protection to companies that acted without court permission.

The House did not include the immunity provision in a similar bill it passed last year. House Republicans now want to adopt the Senate bill, which would avoid contentious negotiations to work out differences between the competing legislation.

About 40 lawsuits have been filed against telecom companies by people alleging violations of wiretapping and privacy laws.

Bush promised to veto any new surveillance bill that did not protect the companies, arguing that it is essential if the private sector is to give the government the help it needs.

The president called the Senate bill a good piece of legislation that allows the intelligence community to monitor communications of foreign terrorists while protecting Americans' liberties. He urged the House to pass the bill and send it to his desk without delay.

The Senate bill provides "fair and just liability protection to those private companies who have been sued for billions of dollars only because they are believed to have done the right thing and assisted the nation after the September 11th terrorist attacks," Bush said.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers said Tuesday he still opposes retroactive immunity.

Story continues below

"There is no basis for the broad telecommunications company amnesty provisions advocated by the administration," Conyers wrote in a letter to White House Counsel Fred Fielding asking for documents about the wiretapping program. The documents have been withheld from Congress.

The 68-29 Senate vote Tuesday to update the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act belied the nearly two months of stops and starts and bitter political wrangling that preceded it. The two sides had battled to balance civil liberties with the need to conduct surveillance on potential adversaries.

At issue is the government's post-9/11 Terrorist Surveillance Program, which circumvented a secret court created 30 years ago to oversee such activities. The court was part of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a law written in response to government abuse of its surveillance authority against Americans.

The surveillance law has been updated repeatedly since then. Congress hastily adopted a FISA modification in August in the face of dire warnings from the White House that changes in telecommunications technology and FISA court rulings were dangerously constraining the government's ability to intercept terrorist communications.

Shortly after its passage, privacy and civil liberties groups said the new law gave the government unprecedented authority to spy on Americans, particularly those who communicate with foreigners.

That law, already extended once, expires Feb. 16.

Doubtful they can work out the differences in the bills by then, Democrats in both the Senate and the House prepared short-term extensions that would keep the law in effect for several more weeks. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky blocked an extension attempt Tuesday. Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the senior Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said Republicans in the House would fight another extension.

The White House said Bush would not sign another 15-day extension of the law.

"The intelligence community needs this good, long-term legislation, not a patchwork of extensions," presidential spokeswoman Dana Perino said. "The House is risking national security by delaying action, and the president will not sign another extension."

On the way to passage, the Senate rejected by a vote of 67-31 a move to strip away a grant of retroactive legal immunity for the companies. It also rejected two amendments that sought to water down the immunity provision.

One of the amendments, co-sponsored by Republican Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, would have substituted the government for the telecom companies in lawsuits, allowing the court cases to go forward but shifting the cost and burden of defending the program.

The other, pushed by California Democrat Dianne Feinstein, would have given a secret court that oversees government surveillance inside the United States the power to dismiss lawsuits if it found that the companies acted in good faith and on the request of the president or attorney general.

While giving the White House what it wanted on immunity, the Senate also expanded the power of the court to oversee government eavesdropping on Americans. The amendment would give the FISA court the authority to monitor whether the government is complying with procedures designed to protect the privacy of innocent Americans whose telephone or computer communications are captured during surveillance of a foreign target.

The bill would also require FISA court orders to eavesdrop on Americans who are overseas. Under current law, the government can wiretap or search the possessions of anyone outside the United States _ even a soldier serving overseas _ without court permission if it believes the person may be a foreign agent.

"You don't lose your rights when you leave American soil," Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said in an interview. Wyden wrote the provision into the bill when it was still being considered by the Senate Intelligence Committee. "In the digital age, an American's rights shouldn't depend on their physical geography."

WASHINGTON — The Senate on Tuesday approved new rules for government eavesdropping on phone calls and e-mails, giving the White House much of the latitude it wanted and granting legal immunity t...
WASHINGTON — The Senate on Tuesday approved new rules for government eavesdropping on phone calls and e-mails, giving the White House much of the latitude it wanted and granting legal immunity t...
Filed by Will Thomas  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
788
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next › Last » (14 pages total)
- Roose I'm a Fan of Roose 10 fans permalink

The list of Vichy Democrats who betrayed us.

Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), Evan Bayh (D-IN), Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Tim Johnson (D-SD), Herb Kohl (D-WI), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Ken Salazar (D-CO), Tom Carper (D-DE), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Jim Webb (D-VA), Ben Nelson (D-NE), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Kent Conrad (D-ND), and Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)

Clinton didn't vote.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:04 PM on 02/12/2008
- thromulese I'm a Fan of thromulese 24 fans permalink
photo

Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), Evan Bayh (D-IN), Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Tim Johnson (D-SD), Herb Kohl (D-WI), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Ken Salazar (D-CO), Tom Carper (D-DE), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Jim Webb (D-VA), Ben Nelson (D-NE), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Kent Conrad (D-ND), and Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)

Traitors to the constitution every one.

If you look closely at this list, these are all the dems that are considered “moderate”. When in fact they are republiCON light. They voted just like the republiCONs, just LIEberman, and just like king george jr, Rove, and Cheney asked them to vote.

Congrats you sniveling, spineless, bush enabling apologists. Not another vote from me will EVER go to Feinstein again (unfortunately she’s my senator). In the next election, if this right wing witch is on the ballot I will vote republiCON.

I am truly surprised, ashamed, and saddened by Mr. Webb joining these traitors, but the rest, well lets just say I am not surprised.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:57 PM on 02/12/2008

Its the Clinton lead Democratic Leadership Council Dems. This organization states that the dems should not run on traditionally populist agendas, which means they said screw the middle class. Don't be surprised to see these people vote for the immunity.

Let's also remember the Evan Bayh is likely Hillary Clinton VP.

Jim Webb, to my great dissappointment, has just disqualified himself for a VP run with Obama after this vote.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:16 PM on 02/12/2008

"If you look closely at this list, these are all the dems that are considered "moderate". When in fact they are republiCON light."


It's the damn MSM which keeps calling them "moderate," as it does McCain.

The take-over of our Constitutional system of democracy could not have happened without the take-over of the MSM.

Operation Mockingbird continues to work as well as it ever did.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:24 PM on 02/12/2008

"The list of Vichy Democrats who betrayed us."

"Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), Evan Bayh (D-IN), Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Tim Johnson (D-SD), Herb Kohl (D-WI), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Ken Salazar (D-CO), Tom Carper (D-DE), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Jim Webb (D-VA), Ben Nelson (D-NE), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Kent Conrad (D-ND), and Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)"

Et tu, Jim Webb?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:29 PM on 02/12/2008

Stabenow voted no on the final bill. There were 3 critical votes. She voted against removing telecom immunity from the Bill, but voted no on the final bill.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:47 PM on 02/12/2008

If you have links to specific cases where these companies participated in "illegal" wiretaps please post. But please only include actual cases not accusations.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:57 PM on 02/12/2008

Don't have a link, but do have a question. If they didn't then why is the Bush Administration threatening a veto of any bill that doesn't grant immunity? If they did not engage in illegal wiretapping, then let them answer in court, and be liable if they did.

The standard is innocent until proven guilty, NOT innocent becuase we now want to let them (and "US" - the governemnt actors) off the hook. I realize in a civil case it is the preponderence of the evidence, but hey, it's only their money at stake in a civil lawsuit, not their life or liberty. And they DID show that was ALL they were concerned about by being willing to end co-operation when the funds were not paid. And IF guilty, let them be liable.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:13 PM on 02/12/2008
- serialcoma I'm a Fan of serialcoma 123 fans permalink
photo

Bwahahahahaaaaaa - asking republican thugs to play by the rules, be ethical and honest! What are you thinking? It'll NEVER happen. They just want us to believe that they are always honest and should never be questioned. And as soon as a question is raised they refuse to answer it, claim they are being picked on and want immediate and retroactive immunity from all crimes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:47 PM on 02/12/2008

If there isn't one specific case the point is mute.

But, just for fun. You contend those individuals, corporations, organizations and other groups, who are asked for help in government investigations, who are informed by the US Justice Department lawyers the actions are both legal and necessary. Who consult with their in house lawyers and outside legal counsel who all tell these people these actions are both legal and necessary. Who follow the legal counsel they are given. Should be held criminally and civilly liable when following the legal advice?

The point is those opposed to the law and the actions of the government are seeking to use civil suits to punish individuals, corporations, organizations and other groups who in good faith cooperate in defending the country. Those who want the law changed should work through the US Congress and not the use of attacks against third parties. But, since they can’t get the law changed they seek to gain the same effect through civil suits. But why? Again, please name one specific case.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:06 PM on 02/12/2008

If that's your position, then what's the problem with dropping retroactive immunity?

But, because you seem to be Google-challenged...

"A federal judge in Detroit ruled yesterday that the National Security Agency's warrantless surveillance program is unconstitutional, delivering the first decision that the Bush administration's effort to monitor communications without court oversight runs afoul of the Bill of Rights and federal law."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/17/AR2006081700650.html

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:34 PM on 02/12/2008

Overturned due to lack of standing. But the court did address the underlying claim about the need for a warrant.
“A wiretap is always “secret” — that is its very purpose — and because of this secrecy,
neither the plaintiffs nor their overseas contacts would know, with or without a warrant, whether their communications were being tapped. Therefore, the NSA’s secret possession of a warrant would have no more effect on the subjective willingness or unwillingness of these parties to “freely engage in conversations and correspond via email,” see ACLU v. NSA, 438 F. Supp. 2d at 770, than would the secret absence of that warrant. The plaintiffs have neither asserted nor proven any basis upon which to justifiably conclude that the mere absence of a warrant — rather than some other reason, such as the prosecution of the War on Terror, in general, or the NSA’s targeting of
communications involving suspected al Qaeda terrorists, affiliates, and supporters, in particular —is the cause of the plaintiffs’ (and their overseas contacts’) reluctance to communicate by telephone or email.
The plaintiffs have argued that if the NSA were to conduct its surveillance in compliance
with FISA, they would no longer feel compelled to cease their international telephone and email communications.30 But again, even if the NSA had (secretly) obtained FISA warrants for each of the overseas contacts, who the plaintiffs themselves assert are likely to be monitored, the plaintiffs would still not have known their communications were being intercepted, still faced the same fear of harm to their contacts, still incurred the same self-imposed (or contact-imposed) burden on communications and, therefore, still suffered the same alleged injury.”

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:39 PM on 02/12/2008
- calfacon I'm a Fan of calfacon 12 fans permalink

Specifics are not available. The Bush regime has never let any of them face the light of the US Judicial System. Calims of national security and executive privilege have stopped any and all investigations.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:46 PM on 02/12/2008

It was reported that Hillary was physically in D.C. during the vote, so I can't imagine a reason for her "not present" vote. Maybe she is just Bush-lite and we know from interviews that he favors her to succeed him.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:53 PM on 02/12/2008

Yes, pun intended before one of my stalkers miss the double point.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:54 PM on 02/12/2008

Hillary is all words and not action when it counts!

Can't wait for this to come up during the debate in Texas.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:52 PM on 02/12/2008
- drkazmd65 I'm a Fan of drkazmd65 55 fans permalink
photo

Our Senators SUCK! (*%^#*$(p^^#^$%#@*&$

That clinches it - if either of my incumbant Democrat(-crap) Senators vote in favor of this crappy-ass bill,... when their times come I am finding their opponet, over either party, and throwing my support behind him/her - unfortunately not until 2010 and 2012 for either of them though!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:34 PM on 02/12/2008
- RedRooster I'm a Fan of RedRooster 21 fans permalink

Another victory for fascism in Festung Amerika.

Heil Verizon!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:26 PM on 02/12/2008

That's Feuhr-izon to you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:36 PM on 02/12/2008
- Manx I'm a Fan of Manx 25 fans permalink

It is unforgivable that Hillary didn't vote on such an important issue. That's the last straw. I would never vote for her under any circumstances.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:10 PM on 02/12/2008
- nellie I'm a Fan of nellie 502 fans permalink
photo

Update on FISA. Dodd will not filibuster, but will work with the House:

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Senate_OKs_immunity_for_telecoms_0212.html

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:07 PM on 02/12/2008
- NYC07 I'm a Fan of NYC07 70 fans permalink

Why did Dodd vote "NEY" ????????

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:56 PM on 02/12/2008

He did no such thing.

Grouped By Vote Position

YEAs ---31

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Casey (D-PA)
Dodd (D-CT)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:45 PM on 02/12/2008

As the retroactive immunity provision not going to be stripped anyway and didn't involve sending other peoples' kids to be killed or maimed, Hillary felt she could afford to miss the vote.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:07 PM on 02/12/2008

As the retroactive immunity provision not going to be stripped anyway and didn't involve sending other peoples' kids to be killed or maimed, Hillary felt she could afford to miss the vote.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:06 PM on 02/12/2008
- mrdontplay I'm a Fan of mrdontplay 3 fans permalink

Hillary calculates on the main issues that affect our life.

We need a decisive leader with courage.

We need to support the one candidate that got this issue right.

Lets stand for something together.

Stop all the BS discussion on she said he said.

This is what it all boils down to.

How did you VOTE?

She got IRAQ WRONG

She got FISA WRONG

How does she justify a promotion?


Its time to wake up america, we are the people we have been waiting for!

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/


YES WE CAN!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:19 PM on 02/12/2008
- moda31 I'm a Fan of moda31 10 fans permalink

Hillary Clinton has already made it abundantly clear that she thinks "lobbyists represent the ordinary american." i'm saddened but not at all surprised that she didn't bother to show up to vote on this. i'm interested to hear what she has to say about this, if the media bothers to do its job and ask her about it.

some people never learn, go ahead and give up your civil liberties without a fight, good luck getting them back, you're sure as hell going to need it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:03 PM on 02/12/2008
- mrdontplay I'm a Fan of mrdontplay 3 fans permalink

We needed someone to have our back.

Who was that person?


HMMMMMMMMmmmmmmmmm??????



OBAMA!


YES WE CAN

Hillary if you are such a leader, where were you?

Maybe at a meeting complaining about the Media coverage again?

This is not leadership.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:14 PM on 02/12/2008
- pizzmoe I'm a Fan of pizzmoe 20 fans permalink

First there's "What's The Matter With Kansas"...Now it's, "What's The Matter With Democrats" ? They are voting against their best interests. I wonder how many if them that voted no had their phones tapped?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:03 PM on 02/12/2008
photo

i wonder how many voted yes because their phones were tapped.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:13 PM on 02/12/2008

The Democratic Party controlled Senate confirmed torturer Mukasey, approved retroactive immunity for the criminal activity of telecoms and expanded the right of the government and telecoms to trample on civil liberties into the future and provided full funding for Bush's, Hillary's and Obama's war (If they won't commit to getting out all of the troops and contractors by 2013, it is their war too).

Now I want to hear from another of the Democratic Party Pavlovian, Nader-baiting trolls to respond that what we have to do is elect more Democrats because we don't have 60 votes. Here, despite having 50 Democrats and 1 Independent, and only needed 41, we couldn't get that 41.

All the Dems want is for us to elect people who trample on our rights and use our young to fight their wars against our interests who are labeled Democrat instead of Republican -- so their cronies can make them rich instead of Republican cronies making Republicans rich.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:47 PM on 02/12/2008
- nellie I'm a Fan of nellie 502 fans permalink
photo

This is why primaries are important. We need to replace corporate republicans and democrats who vote like corporate republicans.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:06 PM on 02/12/2008

Look at this crop of Democratic primaries. We have two warmongering, corporatist Democratic frontrunners running for President, using populist rhetoric to lie their way into office by getting the votes of self-deluded, supposedly progressive Democrats.

The people want out of Iraq. So we get three frontrunners who will not commit to getting out of Iraq -- a choice between three warmongerers.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:13 PM on 02/12/2008
- nellie I'm a Fan of nellie 502 fans permalink
photo

This is why primaries are important. We need to replace corporate republicans and democrats who vote like corporate republicans.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:07 PM on 02/12/2008
- thromulese I'm a Fan of thromulese 24 fans permalink
photo

Not only did the dems vote in favor of the new torture czar Mukasey, he was actually recommended by bush tool and enabler Chucky Schumer.

We as a party have lost our way. We have joined with the torture loving, war mongering, constitution shredding, Geneva convention ignoring, and propaganda catapulting republiCONs. We as a party deserve to lose elections if we cannot stand for something, anything that does NOT agree with the fascist king george and dick.

The dems are doing the bidding of the worst president in our history, and in doing so; they are proving how weak and spineless they are. These dems are as soulless as the man that now darkens the white house.

Congratulations. The dems have shown that they can follow the orders of king George no matter where it takes our once great country.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:30 PM on 02/12/2008
- NYC07 I'm a Fan of NYC07 70 fans permalink

I wonder will the Phone companies now be able to add that "Eavesdropping Surcharge" to our bills to cover the cost of spying on America?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:35 PM on 02/12/2008

That's really unfair. It's going to be the "Expanded Security and Safety Contribution".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:02 PM on 02/12/2008
- NYC07 I'm a Fan of NYC07 70 fans permalink

This is a sad day for America. For the past 8 long years the people in power have gone out of their way do destroy and bury everything that made the U.S the greatest nation in the world and a beacon of hope to millions. The people who created the foundations this country was founded on, and the millions who have fought and died to keep these ideals alive must be weeping and turning in their graves. To be represented and ruled buy a bunch of brought and paid for cowards is unbelievable they have sold the Nation and the Constitution to the highest bidder . One wonders how they can sleep with themselves at night.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:23 PM on 02/12/2008

It must be easy...when you have no conscience...or you lack morality....

I cannot imagine it !!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:37 PM on 02/12/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next › Last » (14 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect