Telecom Immunity

With the White House within reach, what's a few numbers?

Last Friday, the Senate intelligence committee voted to provide retroactive immunity for telecoms, a measure which will likely pass the Senate in coming weeks. As a consequence these companies will be immune from civil suits brought by individuals whose personal phone records have been illegally provided to the government. Although there is a mechanism by which the information could have been handed over legally (court order or certification by the attorney general), the fact that immunity is in play means those requirements were likely not met. As a result, the Senate appears to be coming to the rescue.

If you agree with political stereotypes, then you might expect this from a Republican-controlled Congress (since they have traditionally had the backs of big business). But why would a Democratic-controlled congress protect this industry? You think a steady flow of cash might have something to do with it? Go to opensecrets.org to check out some numbers.

If you're a good card-carrying liberal and you take the position that invasion of privacy in violation of the Constitution is a bad thing, then you'll, of course, be voicing your outrage about what's happening.

Or maybe you'll just let this one slide? After all, there's an election to win.

Malcolm Friedberg is the author of Why We'll Win, a book that explains the law behind hot-button social issues to laypeople.

Comments

[JustifiablyParanoid]

Why, oh why do posts like this not generate the amount of irate comments that can be found in abundance on other just as relevant (and in some cases, not so much) posts!

WAKE UP!!! WAKE UP!!! Our constitutional rights are being pulled apart by this corrupt and downright evil corp-I mean-administration like a sick, twisted and sadistic puppet-master pulls and pulls at a loose thread until the whole thing unravels.

Can you sense my desperation? It really is that serious, folks.

[Alice A.N.]

The irony is that once Democrats are in control of the white house - and Republicans are once again the minority party, the latter immediately become incensed at the civil rights violations that they themselves instituted.

And their outrage will resonate not just with their ilk - currently blinded by solidarity - but also with those of us who truly believe in the constitution.

The biggest irony is of course that the international phone call monitoring is pure hogwash. As someone who is constantly on the phone with folks overseas - I can tell you for a fact that it's not the telecom companies that carry the data; it's the VOIP providers.

I mean with some services you can talk with over 35 countries for free and the rest for a token rate. And if you're smart you'd use a company based outside the US - just to be safe. And unlike an e-mail there's no permanent record of your voice stream floating around the web.

In my circle of friends and extended family, I will be hard pressed to find a single person that makes international phone calls on Verizon or AT&T networks. I doubt that terrorists, who already use the internet as their primary recruiting/propaganda tool haven't figured out VOIP.

[JWakkaJane]

Yet we are conditioned to think of prisons packed with drug addicts when we hear 'criminal'.

I suppose we could go to C-Span to hear this baffling shit rationalized and defended, 'live'?

'hmm, decisions decisions; RAW, or C-Span, RAW or C-Span... which is more 'real'?'