Dodd And Feingold Will Filibuster Telecom Immunity

Senators Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Russ Feingold (D-WI) released the following statement today in response to the announcement that the Senate this week will consider the compromise legislation that would reform the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA):

This is a deeply flawed bill, which does nothing more than offer retroactive immunity by another name. We strongly urge our colleagues to reject this so-called 'compromise' legislation and oppose any efforts to consider this bill in its current form. We will oppose efforts to end debate on this bill as long as it provides retroactive immunity for the telecommunications companies that may have participated in the President's warrantless wiretapping program, and as long as it fails to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans.

"If the Senate does proceed to this legislation, our immediate response will be to offer an amendment that strips the retroactive immunity provision out of the bill. We hope our colleagues will join us in supporting Americans' civil liberties by opposing retroactive immunity and rejecting this so-called 'compromise' legislation.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) says he will support Dodd and Feingold:

"Unfortunately, the FISA compromise bill establishes a process where the likely outcome is immunity to the telecommunications carriers who participated in the President's warrantless wiretapping program. Sen. Reid remains opposed to retroactive immunity, which undermines efforts to hold the Bush Administration accountable for violating the law. Thus, he will cosponsor the amendment offered by Senators Dodd and Feingold to strip out the immunity provision, and support their efforts to strip immunity on the floor. "

Read more about Feingold's efforts to get Democrats to stand up for civil liberties here.

Comments

[Thad]

Big effing deal.

Last time, the Senate was 9 votes short of sustaining a filibuster. And they're not going to gain any votes this time. (Maybe one, if both Kennedy and Obama show up.)

[Clem2]

Feingold and Dodd are true patriots.
Feingold has been outspoken for a long time and I give him a LOT of credit.

Yes, Obama is in a bad spot. I really hope he will vote nay on the bill, but he has to try not to alienate important blocks. I was really mad initially when he voted for it. But I do pretty much trust where his heart is, and if he's elected perhaps he can start to undo some of the violation of civil liberties that has been going on.

[111]

What blocks does he have to be afraid of? The anti-American blocks? The anti-freedom blocks? The anti-liberty blocks?

What happened to the courage of his convictions displayed when he refused to promise the summer gas tax break?

[jackie4444]

"What happened to the courage of his convictions displayed when he refused to promise the summer gas tax break?"

Personally I think that was more strategical calculation than courage of convictions. He
had the facts and experts on his side, he knew it, and he decided to take the route of
trying to make Clinton and McCain appear to be deliberately conning the public, which of course they were.

But I agree with your question applied overall. He refused lobbyist money, even as the primaries strung out and the expenses increased. He refused even traditional if dubious
practices such as the distribution of 'walking around money' tradition in Philly and other places, in which Clinton participated. Other than the week before the PA primary, he largely refused to go negative. To all appearances he gave Wright the benefit of the
doubt initially and severed relations only after Wright's absurd Press Club performance.

To me its just a totally 'different man' from the one we're seeing now. He's still floating on his accumulated momentum from his good-guy primary
campaign right now, 15 points up and all that, but if he keeps alienating his base, that's going to be gone before the convention. Perhaps that will be Mrs. Clinton's argument
in August. None of it makes any sense.

[olivia]

The Republican propaganda machine will to paint Obama as soft on terror if he opposes this bill.

I don't think it would work. America is onto their scheme of taking our freedom away by making people afraid.

[mergina]

They need to cut the political double talk, and go straight for the throat on this one and anything else this illegal thing in the white house sends their way. It will never happen. This latest rape of civil liberties will pass as usual. When there is another attack on this country, life liberty and the pursuit of happiness will completely vanish.

[ObamaEdwards]

I think so, too. This is one of those cases in which Congress needs to respond with a real smackdown. A message needs to be sent about American civil liberties.

[jacqmac]

Obama is in a very BAD position here. Thanks to the Repubs and the 'go along to get along' Democrats. He HAS TWO allies-possibly a THIRD-saying that they WILL filibuster the telecom immunity proviso. Since Obama is now the titular head of the party-this position is BASICALLY HIS POSITION. I doubt sincerely that he doesn't know that the Constitution is being jeopardized. I believe what he has said about investigating the constitutionality of ALL the so-called 'anti-terror' bills that have been passed or put forth in the last eight years. Again-I ask-in all sincerity-IF Obama votes against the entire bill OR ABSTAINS-will those of you who are weeping and wailing about his 'lack of conviction' DEFEND him against the Fear Mongering Republicans or will you just be self-righteously pleased? IF any of you complainers has been reading "The Audacity of Hope" you will see quite clearly how Obama views the current situation in D.C. It ain't pretty and it ain't all cut and dried. Thank YOU Senators Dodd and Feingold. Thank you also to John Conyers, Dennis Kucinich and Lloyed Dogget (TX) for voting NO on this. This is a BAD AMENDMENT on a lukewarm bill. It's a TRAP-set by the Republican minority and y'all who are armchair quarterbacking are falling into it!

[Chillinout]

What does it say about our leaders when they are willing to sacrifice the very values that they say our young men and women are fighting for?

[rovezaleeker]

Thank God the great Senator from my home state of Wisconsin has the balls to do the right thing.

Patriot Act - 99 vote yes - 1 vote no

Proof positive that the majority is not always right.

Thanks Russ.

Put impeachment back on the table!

[olivia]

That lone "no" vote on the Patriot Act should be our next president.

[fcsakes]

I too am deeply disappointed that Obama has not joined this filibuster - saying he will work on it "later" just doesn't give me a warm feeling.

This is a deal breaker for me - this strikes right at the core of our basic rights as Americans. If this bill passes into law, it will be an egregious miscarriage of justice and a piss in the face to every single American.

[Prism]

couldn't agree more. A bait and switch phony just got the Dem nomination.

[Chillinout]

You Clintonista really need to get over the fact that you candidate lost. She has no one to blame but herself. She was so sure that she was going to be the next president that she never had a plan "B." She saw the primary as her coronation.

Whoops.

[olivia]

You need to understand that he has to get elected as president before he can accomplish much of anything. A junior Senator has almost no power at all.

How do you think Hillary will vote on this? McCain? Is Hillary a phony because she votes with the Republicans so often?

[segsig]

I've been a huge Obama supporter, but am deeply disappointed that he didn't step up to the plate and take this stand. This was his first obstacle since becoming the leader of the party. I know it has some of what he wants and he will fight for stripping the immunity, but he needed to be the loudest one out there on THIS bill.

[heal57]

I feel the same way you do. Obama should take the same stand as Feingold and Dodd; even chickens**t Reid did. Obama will not look weak on defense if he supports rights of the American people to not by spied on. He can pick a military guy for VP to shut the repubs up about terrorism.
I am deeply disappointed.
He said he was against the Iraq war [as a state senator] and repeatedly enforced his good judgment. That's why Hillary lost. Now, he's going to cave on this bill and just be one of the many; where's his good judgment now? Sometimes you have to take a stand.
I was going to an Obama meeting at a private house on Saturday, but I don't know if I will be going. My husband feels the way I do and he a Democrat; I'm an Independent.

[JustSaying]

Want to show the party who is in charge? Let your reps know you are paying attention and are willing to show it. The day after this passes change your registration if you are a dem. 100's of thousands of voters changing their registration from dem to whatever will scare the crap out of them and will make headlines. We brought them to majority and we can take them out. Let them know we ARE paying attention.

http://repealfisa.wordpress.com/

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Glenn Greenwald's piece at Salon.com is excellent. Highly recommended. Removes all doubt that this capitulation is in any way good for Americans in general, or Democrats in particular.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/06/24/hoyer/

The Philly Enquirer (referenced by Greenwald) nails it:

" It's incredible to hear Democrats try to justify their capitulation on grounds that they forced Bush to accept an additional $95 billion worth of domestic spending. Unemployment insurance and higher-education benefits for veterans, great stuff. But since when is it right to horse-trade over the cherished, constitutional right to privacy?

There's still time for the Senate to stand up for the Constitution and reject this deal."

Not to mention the deal waives warrants for massive non-individualized domestic communications data "sweeps." In other words, if the invasion of privacy is big enough, warrants are a pain.

[JohnTalbutt]

I am grateful to Feingold and Dodd and hope that those who have violatied the Constitution are brought to justice when Obama wins and the balance in both houses shifts to the left.

But I am not critical of the position Obama has taken. I think he has to be in a position to win even if there is an October suprise.

One of the few ways McCain might win is for Obama to associate his campaign with this effort and there be an attack on U.S. soil which the McCain campaign would claim was made possible by Obama.

The NeoCons did nothing to prevent 9/11 and used it to roll out an agenda based on lies. We would be naive if we put anything past them.

[Sneakerface]

I'm glad someone pointed out that Obama is co-sponsoring "strip-ammendment-of-immunity" - but if that doesn't work, he MUST support the filibuster. This is his big chance to show what kind of leader he is - and the same goes for Sen. Clinton - if she has future national aspirations, she must show she is not just a pandering deal maker . Be a LEADER , Obama ! Be a LEADER, Clinton

Stand up for something, Democrats !

BTW, we should start posting which Democrats are NOT supporting the anti-immunity cause. To start with, in my state, Delaware, we have 2 Senators who are Democrats. When the issue came up a few months ago (and I assume their positions haven't changed), Sen. Biden stood up against immunity, and the other "Democrat, " Sen. Tom Carper, did NOT. I wrote him a letter, and his response was a lame rationalization that the Telecoms were assured beforehand that what they were doing was entirely legal, so we couldn't possibly hold them accountable. If you live in Delaware, let Sen. Carper know what you think of him !!!

[Chillinout]

If you go to either the Senate web site or the House of Representatives web site, you can click on the "roll call" link and it will tell you how each Senator or Representative voted on it.

Both of my Senators, (Dems) voted against it the first time around. I called and emailed them and I am hoping they will again do what is right.

I think a lot of people in Congress think the American people will forget about this soon. Well, I'm not going to forget and I will remind everyone I can when the people that supported this bill come up for reelection.

[Maverick80229]

"Telecoms were assured beforehand that what they were doing was entirely legal, so we couldn't possibly hold them accountable."

Like those poor, little telecoms *didn't* have a huge legal staff to check out all the details before they put their spy-meters on us.

Yeah, right!

[olivia]

Maybe those companies will think twice next time before following the bidding of a criminal president.

Heads must roll over this. It's the only way to make sure it never happens again.

[Visionseeker]

Let Senators Feingold and Senator Dodd establish the narrative, and as it catches, let the O-train weigh in:

“any compromise that compromises the Constitution is a compromise of our essence, our being, our right, we compromise ourselves. If we are to compromise this, where shall we house principles? Where shall we seek our guidance? Are we, as a generation, ready to say that the Founding Fathers were wrong? That they, and all the generations who followed were full of it? I can think of no sentiment more un-American than that and cannot, in good conscience, support what represents a reprehensible assault on the Constitution and the people it serves.”

[Irons]

Obama should throw his support to Feingold and Dodd and defeat Hoyer and Pelosi once and for all.

[Larry of Corrales]

Thank God for Russ Feingold and Chris Dodd (and while I'm thinking about it, Dennis Kucinich). If he finds his cojones maybe Obama will join them. I understand he teaches Constitutional law, but yet he votes for bills which diminish our constitutional rights.