House Dems Near Surrender on Bush Spying

Tuesday's Washington Post reports that House Democrats are close to granting all of President Bush's demands for more domestic spying powers and telecommunications amnesty, in exchange for, well, nothing:

House and Senate Democratic leaders [say they are close to a bill giving the President] more domestic surveillance powers and grant[ing] phone companies some form of immunity for their role in the administration's warrantless wiretapping program...

Unlike the Senate leadership, senior House Democrats have been fighting Bush's demand that telecommunications companies receive blanket amnesty for warrantless surveillance. Even when Bush refused to sign an extension of the surveillance bill without amnesty, the Democrats held firm and let the measure expire, drawing attack ads and fear-mongering from the G.O.P. By surrendering now, Democrats would not only ratify the administration's assault on the rule of law. They would also be practicing a self-destructive brand of political cannibalism that thins their ranks and enervates their base. Salon's Glenn Greenwald explains it in crushing detail, which I think is worth quoting at length:

The signs are unmistakably clear that what was always inevitable -- full compliance by the House Democratic leadership with Bush's demands on warrantless eavesdropping and telecom amnesty -- is now imminent... There's very little point anymore in writing about how the Congressional Democratic leadership is complicit in all of the worst Bush abuses, or about how craven they are. All of that is far too documented....But what is somewhat baffling in all of this is just how politically stupid and self-destructive their behavior is. If the plan all along was to give Bush everything he wanted, as it obviously was, why not just do it at the beginning? Instead, they picked a very dramatic fight that received substantial media attention. They exposed their freshmen and other swing-district members to attack ads. They caused their base and their allies to spend substantial energy and resources defending them from these attacks.

And now, after picking this fight and letting it rage for weeks, they are going to do what they always do -- just meekly give in to the President, yet again generating a tidal wave of headlines trumpeting how they bowed, surrendered, caved in, and lost to the President. They're going to cast the appearance that they engaged this battle and once again got crushed, that they ran away in fear because of the fear-mongering ads that were run and the attacks from the President. They further demoralize their own base and increase the contempt in which their base justifiably holds them (if that's possible). It's almost as though they purposely picked the path that imposed on themselves all of the political costs with no benefits.

The Post even floats one Democratic ploy to hide the ball: a "procedural move would allow many Democrats to vote against immunity but still make its approval all but certain." I don't think Democratic voters will be fooled by that "move." Even if you don't follow the floor rules closely -- and Speaker Pelosi can prevent most of Bush's demands from coming to a vote at all -- it's obvious when the Democratic Congress caves. It's especially striking on issues like Constitutional rights and Iraq, where Democrats cave after loudly declaring their commitment to fight. Back in October, I wrote about this tendency to "Rage and Cave":

If you believe the papers, Congressional Democrats have spent the better part of the past seven years vacillating between shock and outrage. They are thunderstruck by every White House scandal, stunned to discover another lie from the Bush Administration and positively livid each time they realize Bush is negotiating in bad faith. That is, of course, until they cave again. The Democrats' current rush to pass the President's intelligence bill repeats this sorry pattern. After roughly three years of outrage over illegal domestic spying--complete with [Sen. Pat Leahy's] roars of "Shame on us!"--Democrats are now pushing legislation to validate more warrantless surveillance of American citizens.

It's only gotten worse since October. Just this week, Bush's attorney general flatly refused to enforce contempt citations issued by Congress to investigate allegations of criminal conduct by White House officials. House Democrats say they are outraged and they will fight the attorney general. But the spying bill grants the attorney general new powers to prevent courts from reviewing the administration's conduct.

In the end, the Democrats have not offered a coherent explanation for this policy or their political surrender. After following this issue closely, I can't explain it either. As Greenwald writes, even on the most cynical terms, this was the worst possible route. And on principal, of course, there is no defense for retoractive amnesty, which stymies court oversight and undermines the rule of law.

---
From The Nation.

Attn NY Readers: We'll talk about the spying fight, progressive politics and the netroots at this free panel on Wednesday night, if you want to stop by:

How the Netroots are Changing Progressive Politics CUNY Graduate Center, Proshansky Auditorium, 365 Fifth Avenue Wednesday, 6:30pm

This Nation event will convene progressive leaders and writers for a lively discussion of how the netroots are changing progressive politics. Participants will include Katrina vanden Heuvel, publisher and editor of The Nation; Zephyr Teachout, assistant professor of law, Duke University, and an architect of Howard Dean's Internet strategy; Matt Stoller, a founding blogger of OpenLeft and President of BlogPAC; Roberto Lovato, a writer at New America Media and blogger for Of América; and Ari Melber, a correspondent for The Nation and a contributing editor at Personal Democracy Forum.

The event is free of charge. Please arrive early.

Follow Ari Melber on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AriMelber

Comments

[lgillooly]

I am extremely disappointed that they will cave on Telecom Immunity.What happened to swearing to uphold the Constitution? They all make me sick.How can we give Bush what he wants when he was spying on Americans well before 9/11? What are these Democrats so afraid of? Does he have dirt on them all from wiretapping them? Please,for the sake of this Country,do NOT give Telecom Companies immunity.We NEED to know when and what they were asked to do.

[FullChat]

The wiretapping done since 9/11 is one thing - overzealous and illegal, but somewhat understandable in the wake of 9/11.

What about what was happening BEFORE 9/11? Bush was spying on us in March 2001!! And don't tell me that it was terrorism related, or Bush wouldn't have blown off the PBR "Bil Laden determined to attack inside the United States".

This was pure domestic spying, illegal and unjustified by terrorism.

If you must cave, Dems, make the retroactive immunity go back to 9/11 - and no further - and investigate only what took place before 9/11. BTW, Dems, this takes you off the hook for what happened after 9/11, too - unless you knew about the spying before 9/11. If you knew about that, you deserve to go to jail.

[tricky69]

The telecommunication companies were all doing something illegal, minus Qwest, and now the criminals running the show want them to receive immunity from being sued? This is as f****ed up as the rest of this criminal, corrupt administration as we've witnessed since Nixon.

[JohnFromCensornati]

"The Post even floats one Democratic ploy to hide the ball: a "procedural move would allow many Democrats to vote against immunity but still make its approval all but certain." I don't think Democratic voters will be fooled by that "move." "

Tell us Ari, why do you think the voters won't be fooled?
The Dims pulled exactly the same stunt on Iraq funding.
I know I won't be fooled.
I'm through voting for them.
Let the GOP win.
The Dims let them have what they want anyway.

[tea in the harbor]

As we slowly swirl together into the toilet of history, look up, my friends. Look up at the brown eye of The Bushstopo. Watch it's sly wink at our impotence! Surely, our Founding Fathers look down with disdain as WE allow their grand experiment to fail! WE will not die for FREEDOM, we will blame each other, WE will not stand together, we will crumble in small groups. As our polititians lead us into this new dark age, look into the eyes of your children, tell them that fear has beaten us, tell them the deal is done! Franklin saw it coming "Those who sacrifice their freedom for security deserve neither" and so it is!

[Sloane7]

And this is why the Congress has an approval rating as bad as W's. Do we ask all new Democrats to run? Guaranteed, if all new Democrats ran they would win as they could all share the same campaign message - I promise I will do more than the last Democrat you elected.

[TheShadow]

These weak kneed wimps have got to go. What they know is that we cannot vote them out en masse because the alternatives are the other jerk-offs that are even more dangerous waiting in the wings.

How frustrating. Will we ever see stand-up, ethical people govern in this country?

[desmirl]

The only way to deal with the Democrats is to STOP GIVING THEM MONEY! One of their fundraisers called me the other day, and after I'd gone through a ten-minute litany of CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRAT FAILURES, she started crying. I told her that if, and when, DEMOCRATS STOP BEING INVERTEBRATES, I might think of donating a few bucks--just to test the waters.

[marignymitch]

Congressional Democrats once again are chosing to surrender to this wildly unpopular president. Unbelieveable. I don't understand why they are so eager to humiliate themselves. Bush is the only constituency for telecom amnesty. He's the bill's sole beneficiary in that it shields him from prosecution for his manifold crimes against the Constitution and the American people. It is in essence obstruction of justice, a criminal enterprize. And no one other than Bush clamors for its passage.

Yet the Democrats conspire to protect him too, despite the disapproval of the American people and despite further damage to their credibility and their esteem as lawmakers sworn above all to uphold the Constitution. By their cowardice Democrats on the hill have rightfully earned the contempt of the American people (and Republicans including the president). It baffles me that Democrats eat crow with such relish. Bush wins and the Democrats (and the nation) lose.

The price for surrender is high. But the Democrats are repeatedly willing to pay it. The reason why, I can only guess, is because telecom lobbyists pay more. That or Bush has blackmailed them into submission.

[research]

Nancy: What's with you and your Neville Chamberland invocation?

Oh, we have to give into the republicans,

otherwise they will keep on complaining?

So what?

[Liberal2]

research? Do a little. Chamberlain reflected the British electorate who rememebered their losses during WWI. He wasn't some standalone pacifist. Even Americans didn't want any part of a war in Europe.

Pelosi's problem is her institutional memory of how fickle the American electorate is regarding democrats. You might consider the 1994 election when rethugs took over Congress. A small tax increase which slowly began to produce a balanced federal budget was the trigger for that election loss. She also has the example of Shwarzenneger (sp?) being a part of the coup to unseat Davis.

We need to replace not just rethugs but many democrats.

[research]

I was referring to Neville's appeasement of fascism.

[peaceandfreedom]

Why don't you just come right out and say it, Ari? We no longer have a two party system; we have crossed the line into fascist totalitarianism; the illegal spying has allowed a level of information gathering on Everyone, but especially on members of both houses of Congress, that enables the Bush regime to force them to pass what ever he wants.

Just say it; The system is broken! Tell the people, "You're posts here, your water cooler conversations, your Votes, mean nothing, now! Congress has already passed a bill, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, that will put most of the posters in Halliburton camps for even thinking the things they write here that question the government.

Everyone shakes their head and asks, why do the Dems cave? Oh, why does the neo-con agenda still move forward? And the answer you don't want to hear, the one that even Ari and other well meaning bloggers won't state unequivocally because they fear the repercussions--and well they should--is that this is no longer a nation of, by, and for the People. Both parties are bought and paid for by Corporate interests. They no longer have any real differences. And to play at that level, you have already sold your soul. And it is the People who pay the price!

The answer: Read your Constitution and you will find it there.

[itmaybetoolate]

Well said! Scary, sad, and true.

[tricky69]

The Democrats are the same as the Republicans, and vice versa! There is NO difference between either criminal, corrupt, and complicit party. They serve their true masters, the elites, globalists, bankers, and the Israeli Lobby, with contempt for we the people! And it's worse for those millions of innocent Muslims, Arabs, etc., who WILL be slaughtered in the name of the fraudulent "War On Terror". The establishment gave us the Democrats in '06 to quell our outrage and deliberately outed the Republican patsies to appease us! And look what the Democrats HAVEN'T done! The politicians are actors, minus a few patriots, who serve the interests of Israel, the elites, the bankers and globalists. As well as their criminal crimes against humanity.

[winoohno]

In 2006 there was a WATERSHED moment in recent politics when the Democrats assumed leadership of Congress. They promised everything under the sun: reversal of Iraqi War direction; cutting spending; evening out the tax code; ethics reform; standing up to Bush, etc.

What has happened instead: NOTHING! No one has the courage or resolve to stand up to the Administration. I cannot understand why... because CLEARLY the Will of the People is on their side -- just look at any poll taken -- the American people are FINALLY catching on that we are in the midst of the most criminal Presidential Administration ever!

WAKE UP - and keep making noise - in 10 or 20 years from now we are going to look back at this period of history as a very dark time, and not many of us will have a clear conscience because we didn't do enough to speak out about these atrocities.

[Jimco]

They're probably worried about backlash . When you're up against someone with a 19% approval rating you have to tread lightly or risk political suicide . If bush weren't so popular I'm sure the dems would be more aggressive . They probably feel that because both he and his policies have such strong support with the public they are forced to go along , no matter what the base wants . Either that or he has some interesting information on many of them from his wiretap program . Or it could be because they are getting wads of money from the same corporate interests as the republicans . Whatever , I'm confident their reasoning is solid .

[breakfast]

Sorry for the redundancy, but I have to say this again.

When Bush went to Russia to commune with Putin, he did indeed look into his soul and he saw a kindred spirit, an authoritarian personality type intent on one party rule.

And one party rule it is. The Democrats do not fail to stand up to the Bush cabal because of their weakness, but because they are essentially in board with Bush policies and don't really mind his methods.

And even if they weren't on board, they still have their campaigns financed by the same global financial interest.

Welcome to the new and improved, uniquely American version of Fascism. And just like the Germans in the 30's, we voted for it.