Opponents of Retroactive Immunity Live To Fight Another Day

That the United States Senate would even have to debate whether to uphold the rule of law is infuriating enough. But two weeks ago, the contrast in priorities became too much: as the Senate refused to address the tide of foreclosures impacting more than 8,000 people every day, it was poised and ready to provide immunity to giant corporations that may have broken the law.

So, I did what I felt I had to: I said no.

By blocking a vote on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the fight to stop retroactive immunity goes on -- for another week anyway. The Senate will take the bill up again this week as it returns from the July 4th recess.

Of course, such procedural jujitsu was merely the latest twist in a fight that has now spanned nearly a year. During that time, I have used every forum available to me -- from the Senate floor to the presidential campaign to town halls around the country -- to talk about the importance of the rule of law and why a seemingly obscure dispute between government and corporations in our legal system is critical to upholding it.

A brief overview: we learned after September 11, 2001 that giant telecom companies worked with this administration to compile Americans' private, domestic communications records into a database of enormous scale and scope. The Bush administration appears to have convinced those corporations to spy on Americans for five years, in secret and without a warrant.

That we know this happened is not because the government told us -- they say the matter is classified. And it is not because one of the telecoms told us. We may not have known any of this at all were it not for serious investigative journalists. And we wouldn't know how deep the problem really went without an Internet technician by the name of Mark Klein, a 22-year veteran of AT&T who one day at work found a switch that channeled Internet traffic culled from millions of living rooms, bedrooms, kitchens and offices across the nation to a secret room operated by the National Security Agency. Mr. Klein was old enough to remember when a law was passed to prevent this sort of unchecked spying operation from happening:

FISA -- a law written back in 1978 in the wake of Watergate that ensured the government had both the tools it needed to defend the country and a process in place for judicial review to put checks on executive authority.

Most agree that this law needs to be modernized, as it has been many times over the years. But this time, the president is asking Congress to do something much more: to shield the telecoms from any judicial review of their actions. He wants Congress to declare spying without a warrant both constitutional and necessary to defend this country.

It is neither.

That is why I have done everything I can to stop retroactive immunity from being included in the FISA bill. As written, this bill does not say, "Trust the American people." It does not say, "Trust the courts and judges and juries to come to just decisions" about what happened at the telecoms. Rather, retroactive immunity sends this message:

"Trust me" -- a message that comes straight from the mouth of President Bush. I would never take "trust me" for an answer, not even in the best of times. Not even from a president on Mount Rushmore.

Besides, what exactly is the basis for that trust? Retroactive immunity may be a disgrace in itself, but it is merely the latest link in a long chain of abuses when it comes to contempt for the rule of law -- from the Justice Department basing its work on political calculations, to the shame of Abu Ghraib, to the passage of the Military Commissions Act, which sanctioned torture. The list goes on and on.

To many around the world, that is what America has become. Where Normandy, the Marshall Plan, and the Nuremberg trials invoked the image of America for previous generations, those coming of age today will now think of Guantanamo, waterboarding, and torture. People now have a basis upon which to ask whether the president serves the law or the law serves the president.

Did the telecoms break the law? I don't know.

But I am sure that if we pass retroactive immunity we'll never know. A handful of favored corporations will remain unchallenged. Their arguments will never be heard in a court of law. The truth behind this unprecedented domestic spying will never see light. And the cases will be closed forever.

I'm under no illusion that we will be able to keep this bill from the president's desk forever; two weeks ago, I was disappointed that we could only muster 15 votes out of the necessary 41 to block consideration of FISA.

But every second we can continue to raise this issue and hold this Administration's feet to the fire for its contempt for the rule of law these last seven years is another opportunity to keep asking:

When we undermine the rule of law, do we make our nation more secure -- or less?

Over the next few days, that's the question we'll be asking. But I think we already know the answer.

Follow Sen. Chris Dodd on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SenChrisDodd

Comments

[dsigeorge]

Thank you Senator Dodd. You have demonstrated true leadership and are an example for others (Senator Obama).

[ESerafina42]

Amen to that! He needs to take you and Gen. Wesley Clark as examples, not the craven invertebrates who cave to a guy with a 28% approval rating every time he says "Boo!"

[DuPageDem]

Thank you, thank you, thank you Sen. Dodd. You are a true patriot and defender of the Bill of Rights. America is behind you. Those who favor immunity have been bought and paid for by telecom corps.

[steamboat]

Both Bill and Hillary Clinton each have more brains in their little finger than Dodd has in his entire body.

[wheresthebeef]

Cauliflower. (Every bit as germane, and with less wasted space.)

[serena1313]

Senator Dodd Thank You

A Daily Kos post explains how domestic spying is affecting people's credit and employment. The information collected is in minute detail has already started affecting people. One a truck driver was wrongly terminated for legitimately complaining about the safety of his 18-wheeler.

"Post-9/11 government requirements to make records electronic - from medical histories, to school records, to security clearance applications - opened the door to cheap, automated monitoring by computers. But, those millions of bits of information would be useless if one could not tie them to a single, specific person. The Bush administration's push for REAL ID addressed that problem."

"In other cases, workers have been blacklisted or denied insurance based on medical records (which the Bush administration insists must be electronic) or on records of workers comp claims....­"

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/7/6/154528/8988/841/545298

Too many take freedom for granted nor recognize when it is incrementally being taken away. The same thing happened in Germany, Italy and elsewhere. Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, the Nazis, the Czech Secret Police used surveillance as a mechanism to close open societies. Echoes from the past cannot be ignored.

The FISA bill is dangerous and may eventually have an effect on free speech.

Naomi Wolf said it best, "Surveillance leads to fear and fear leads to silence. And silence is un-America­n."

I recommend reading her book "The End of America, Letter of Warning To A Young Patriot."

[ESerafina42]

I second the recommendation of Naomi Wolf's book. I'm a little over halfway through it now, and it is CHILLING.

[Jonni Rae]

Besides CORIs and drug tests , employers are now doing credit checks on prospective employees!! No lie. How much power do we want to give them?? If we can find out through lawsuits the extent of the wiretapping and the people who had access and what it was or could potentially be used for, we will have started to take our lives back.

[Quitcherbichin]

"Besides CORIs and drug tests , employers are now doing credit checks on prospective employees!!"

So what is wrong with that? Evidently you don't believe that employers should have the right to hire employees who are responsible and honest. I know if I were looking for an employee and I had to choose between someone who had excellent credit or someone on the cusp of bankruptcy the choice would be a no brainer. Of course the prospective employee should be allowed to explain the circumstances of his poor credit, but in the end, the vast majority of cases personal responsibility rules.

[cynara]

I am proud to say that I just donated to Chris Dodd. The Obama campaign called me this morning asking for another donations. I said I would be waiting to see what he does regarding this FISA so-called "compromise" before deciding whether or not to give him any more money.

What the government is demanding is facism, plain and simple. It is sending a strong message to corporations with this legislation - nothing is illegal if done in collusion with the US government and if you refuse a US government request, no matter how lawful, you will be prosecuted and denied government contracts (i.e. Qwests fate...) This is a fight for the rule of law vs. blind obedience to government requests.

[Marlyn]

"What the government is demanding is fascism, plain and simple."

YUP.

[TXfemmom]

Thank you Senator Dodd, and Senator Feinstein for being true patriots and for being willing to stand up for what is right and good.

Let's face it...civil litigation and the ability to force these guys to give evidence which is damning to them may well be the only way we will ever know the full truth.

[Marlyn]

Senator Feinstein?

[Marlyn]

Try Feingold.

[batguano]

Yes, thanks to Chris Dodd, but NOT to Diane Feinstein who has been a good little Bush/Neocon soldier and supports the Telecom immunity bill.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/11/10/feinstein/index.html
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/11/09/BA13T97BN.DTL
..........­.I believe you meant to include Sen Russ Feingold who is a strong opponent of the Telecom Bill. Both Sen Dodd and Sen Feingold have said they would filibuster any granting of retroactive immunity to Telecom co's, and should be supported. The sad thing is that so few "Dems" will stand up for our Republic and the rule of law with them It's too bad that there are so many quisling Dems who support Bush and his wars, spying, tax rip-offs, obscene military spending and other outrages. Dems in name only......­Feinstein is one of the worst.
Read about her war profiteering here http://www.antiwar.com/frank/?articleid=8609

[gregk991]

"I'm under no illusion that we will be able to keep this bill from the president's desk forever; two weeks ago, I was disappointed that we could only muster 15 votes out of the necessary 41 to block consideration of FISA."

Can anyone explain why only 15 votes can be garnered to block consideration of this lastest version of FISA? How many Democrats are in the Senate? More than 15? Where are the rest of the Democrats and the libertarian-leaning Republicans on this issue?

Could it be that if the telecoms are held to task for their illegal spying activities some very sensitive and no doubt embarrassing information will be revealed in open court? Could Dodd be fighting this cause knowing the immunity will be granted anyway, giving himself an opportunity to look like a hero to the left? Of course I hope he is doing this out of conviction but I'm just asking. This looks to me like the telecoms have some good dirt on the majority, if not all, of Congress and they will use it if they have to.

[pjcpa]

This is why we need term limits for all parties in both sides of congress. They are so tied up in keeping power and trying to make everyone happy, that they make very few happy. There was a reason why we did this with the President's position and I think we are overdue for this restriction in Congress.

[wheresthebeef]

I'm an Americaan citizen living in Mexico, where there are term limits for just about every political office. As a result, a) there's no continuity from election cycle to election cycle, which makes for an incredible amount of inefficiency and re-invention of the wheel, and b) the politicians, knowing that they can't be re-elected anyway, just steal with both hands for as long as their terms last. We already have great, de facto term limits in the U.S....the­y're called "elections­."

[Marlyn]

I don't know about the dirt, but they get a lot of MONEY from lobbyists.

[Jonni Rae]

Do something!! Call you senators now!! You can use this site to get the numbers and get your calls recorded: http://tools.advomatic.com/7/fisa. I did it. It is easy. Let's put the pressure on!!

[gregk991]

I live in Texas where we have two of the most worthless Senators ever to darken the doorstep of the Capitol building in Washington. It's not even worth trying here. They probably helped to write the FISA compromise!

[Vasudeva]

Ron Paul sounds better all the time.

[Marlyn]

Is he running?

[Dansden]

'SUPPLY-SIDE ECONOMICS' is the 'politrically correct' wording for FASCISM!!!!!!!!

The ONLY reason I keep referring to our present collusion of politics and private industry benefits is
BECAUSE IT IS TRUE THAT FASCISM NOW DETERMINES AMERICAN TREASURY, POLITICS, LEGISLATION AND LAW- The Supreme Court conservatives nominated by BUSHCO Cabal are ALL FASCIST IN THEIR LEGISLATING, JUDGMENTS AND DECISIONS.­...it is not difficult to see when Americans look honestly at who controls our U.S. Constitution- and it 'ain't' the people anymore,,,,,,

[Marlyn]

Agreed.

[katok]

Well stated! I'll take Dodd (or Feingold or Kucinich)for Preident. Lets start now.

[itmaybetoolate]

Senator Dodd, you are a true patriot. Thank you for standing up and defending the Constitution while so many of your colleagues refuse to do so. Keep up the good fight Senator!

[tellinya]

Vote Dem this year or keep dragging your knuckles.

[Marlyn]

It looks HOPELESS to vote for Dems. Look at what they are doing!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Vote GREEN as a protest. You won't be throwing your vote away, because it doesn't count for anything anyway.

[itmaybetoolate]

Dodd is a Democrat - one you can be proud of.

[HansB]

Wonderful! As in 2000. I humbly thank all Green voters for having given the world Bush, an unnecessary war, eight precious years lost in the global warming challenge, increased inequality, mercenaries, an almost-complete return to fascism (vote Green in 2008 to confirm that choice!), and so on.

What I really love about dogmatic people is that they never learn. They'll drive over a second cliff after having seen what the first one did to the kids and the spouse - never mind the vehicle.

[Quitcherbichin]

Finally, a greenie that admits a vote for their party is throwing your vote away. I wish there more of you grass eaters who voted green.

[Gma11]

Thank you, Senator Dodd.

[Agnim]

Trust the Trojan Horse and divisive Dems to AGAIN seek to 'snatch defeat from the jaws of victory'! lol

Instead of going at Obama,

GO AT BUSH!

Bush is the one trashing the Constitution!

Obama RESPECTS THE US CONSTITUTION!

As a US legislator,

If one cannot get 100% success with a piece of legislation, it would be foolish, childish for a pragmatic legislator to paralyzed the US Government and not take 70% over ZERO % of a piece of legislation!

Unlike "stay the destructive course" bush, Obama is a pragmatist!

A leader should be a pragmatist. If he can't get 100%, then maybe 70% success is not so bad FOR THE TIME BEING!

Pragmatist for President!

Bush is the one undermining the Constitution!
IMPEACH BUSH!
Not Barack!

[dsigeorge]

Pragmatism does not equal leadership!

[ohmercy]

a,
If Obama respected the Constitution he would vote against this bill.
His oath of office says he will protect and defend the constitution. This bill is an attack on the Constitution.

2.
It matters not what Obama's new role is. Voting for this bill makes him unfit to lead. A president is a placeholder in an office not a personality that we should "trust."
This is why we have a Constitution.
Anyone who votes for this bill should be thrown out of office.

3. Senator Obama doesn't want to pursue Impeachment. In case you haven't noticed Impeachment was swept off the table and the table was put in storage by those who supported Obama.
I wonder if they were afraid that Hillary would press for it.
Obama does not want to create friction with Repubsw so going after the current administration ain't gonna happen.
He will learn a bitter lesson in thinking he can achieve bi-partisanship wiith p[eople who only care about installing a permanent majority.
They screwed Bill Clinton royally and he went in wanting to be a "consensus builder." The way you people blame him for things which the neocons were responsible for, and defend the same things in Obama is pretty fricking scary.

[gregk991]

Is that why you are voting for McCain? Because if you vote for Nader or some other third party loser that is exactly what you will be doing in effect-voting for McCain. Does McCain represent your values better than Obama? And what exactly makes you think HRC would pursue impeachment of Bush. She's in the Senate-has she set forth articles of impeachment or signed on to Kucinich's effort? Nope. And she won't. And she lost the nomination. Please don't start projecting all your lost hopes on woulda-sho­ulda-could­a for HRC. It's also funny how you use the name "Bill Clinton" and "screwed" in the same sentence.

[abouttime]

I don't want to impeach Senator Obama, but when he votes to give immunity to a corporation that supplied confidential citizen correspondance to a NSA computor, I object will all my convictions. I am pragmatic on this issue. To compromise on fundamental protections against unreasonable searches is a breach of all of our rights. If Obama were pragmatic he would not have buckled to the cabal and would have sided with our constitutional protections. The "good Germans" in the 1930's who did not oppose Hitler, by your definition, were pragmatic?
Give us liberty or give us fascism. That is pragmatic.

[Quitcherbichin]

"I am pragmatic on this issue."

I wonder if you would be as pragmatic on this issue if some Muslim terrorist was hacking at your neck with a blade.

[Marlyn]

"Bush is the one trashing the Constitution!"

Yes, but Obama says he'll EXPAND Bush's UNCONSTITUTIONAL faith-based initiatives.

So we the people are SOL.

[Dansden]

We remember the 'lock-step' walk with Sen. Obama that Sen. Dodd tiook some weeks ago-
AND NOW, he is VOTING DIFFERENT THAN SEN. OBAMA- like so many AMERICANS are pleading and ranting for him to do....This FISA Sham bill is a GIVEAWAY to the CORPORATIONS WHO ARE SUPPORTING SEN. OBAMA and denying American Constitutional rights guaranteed to our citizenship-
It is called FASCISM!!

Now, The Democratic Party leaders, Reid and Pelosi are with Sen. Obama in voting against our guaranteed rights to NOT be spied upon by our own GOVERNMENT! If this is THE CHANGE THAT SEN. OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY HAS PROMISED I THINK I WILL VOTE FOR RALPH NADER- because neither major party is supporting working families and middle-class Americans anymore- ONLY CORPORATE INTERESTS AND CORPORATE GREED!!!! and look at all the 'wonderful' things the large corporations have brought to the :
HOUSING MARKET;
THE STOCK MARKET;
THE FUTURES MARKET;
THE GROCERY MARKET;
THE AUTO MARKET;
THE HEALTHCARE MARKET;
THE VACATIONEER'S MARKET;
THE ....the list goes on...
MAYBE THAT'S THE CHANGE AMERICA CAN LIVE WITH, because the 'change' that the major parties are representing is MORE OF THE SAME RUTHLESS AND RANCOROUS ATTACK ON freedom loving Americans.­....

[ohmercy]

I don't recall Senator Dodd walking in lockstep with Senator Obama.

Endorsing someone is not walking in lockstep.
Further Senator Dodd has been at the forefront of this issue and Obama supported him in a filibuster when he was still trying to get the nomination.

I find it inexcusable that Obama is voting for this.
Much of the rest of his supposed "flip flopping I think is over blown garbage from the media, plus politics and can be worked with and negotiated but this is non negotiable.

Maybe I will write in Dodd/Feingold.
I wanted Feingold to run anyway and for a time I favored Dodd.

[ohmercy]

a little more that didn't fit:

OT sort of.

Flip Flop or Flim Flanm, I can't decide but it is curious to me that as soon as the nomination was clinched he began moving to the center while telling us he "consistently" did this and that when questioned.

He also has been using a lot of Bill Clinton people, which I have no problem with and modeling many of his ideas after, which I also have no problem with. Triangulation means taking the best from both sides as the platform and pretty much ignoring the far left and right fringe.
The thing is when Bill did it once he took office he moved further to the left, no doubt with some input from Hillary who is more progressive than Obama on many social issues. Obama hasn't been elected and he is moving toward the right... I do have a problem with that and I do have a problem with him denigrating the Clinton presidency and now using some of Bills policy ideas.

[timemagician]

Thank you Senator Dodd. We're fighting behind you as hard as we can. We need your voice.
Thank you.