Bush and the Phone Companies: Partners in Crime

Phone companies have opened a new front in their campaign against the free flow of information. This time they've found a powerful ally in the White House.

AT&T and Verizon have already shown their disdain for free speech and Net Neutrality, and their eagerness to let government spies lurk on our phone calls. Now, their lobbyists have teamed with President George Bush to strong arm Congress into granting full immunity for a disturbing array of illegal and unconstitutional acts.

Bush: Siding with AT&T and against the rest of us

A handful of legislators, though, are holding out against the pressure, which is no small feat given the extreme powers behind the amnesty grab.

Money, Politics and the Law

Both Verizon and AT&T spend hundreds of millions of dollars on campaign contributions, congressional junkets, Washington lawyers, lobbyists and PR campaigns.

Much of this political clout is now being focused on one issue: elevating phone companies above the law so they can invade our homes via phone lines, the Internet and other modern communications -- acting as the ultimate gatekeepers against the free flow of information.

Earlier this year they were caught handing over customer phone records to the National Security Agency (NSA). The phone companies first denied it and then started a quiet campaign with the White House to gain immunity from any lawsuits.

The campaign got a lot louder on Wednesday, when President Bush told reporters that he would veto a new FISA eavesdropping bill that doesn't grant retroactive immunity to the phone companies.

Thus far, about 40 active lawsuits name several telecommunications companies for alleged violations of wiretapping laws. Other suits are in the works, pending this legislation.

A Few Brave Congress People

Despite the intense pressure from lobbyists and the White House, Americans are telling Congress that they're fed up with the abuse.

On Wednesday, some of our representatives showed that they were listening. The House Judiciary Committee voted down an amendment to the FISA bill, which would have granted legal immunity to Verizon and AT&T for an as yet unspecified list of legal violations. (The White House and NSA have thus far refused to reveal to us just how far the phone company legal abuse has gone).

Democrats will bring the bills to the full House for passage next week. The Senate Intelligence Committee will be introducing its own bill. The House move against immunity should serve as a guide for their colleagues in Senate chambers. [See update below]

Telecommunication companies are among the most powerful political donors in the United States. They have also worked hand-in-hand with the Bush administration to whittle away our constitutional freedoms, all the while seeking special policy favors and a rubber stamp for a recent spate of mega-billion-dollar telco mergers.

Protecting Free Speech Everywhere: Democracy's Last Stand

Today's committee vote might be a hopeful sign that their political clout has its limits. But this fight is far from over. Bush is still threatening to veto any legislation that doesn't hold his telco friends above the law.

It begs the question: Why would someone stick out his neck so far to protect such bad actors?

Amnesty for AT&T and Verizon for illegally wiretapping Americans is a stunning example of the ways this White House sides with their corporate benefactors against the most fundamental democratic principles. The Bush administration would rather flout the laws for themselves and other friends in high places than protect the free speech and privacy of law abiding Americans.

Phone companies can't be trusted to act in good faith to protect the free flow of information. The White House can't be trusted to stand with ordinary Americans and the Constitution against its own special interests. Congress must step in to protect our rights to use phones, text messaging and the Internet with policies that keep the lines open, neutral and free of corporate and government gatekeepers.

The fight for these basic freedoms will be fought in Congress. It's time everyone got involved.

[UPDATE: Glenn Greenwald reports that the Senate version of the bill introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D - W. Va.) DOES contain full retroactive amnesty for the telcos. Greenwald points to Rockefeller's long history on the receiving end of phone company contributions as possible explanation]

Follow Timothy Karr on Twitter: www.twitter.com/TimKarr

Comments

[sport73]

Check with Joe Nacchio over @ Qwest!

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/27643

[sport73]

This is what happens when you "just say no"!

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/27643hiss is what happens when you "just say no"!

[DICKERSON3870]

The licenses that Israel gives to cell phone companies contain a secret codicil requiring them to give the Shin Bet security service information about conversations and messages that its customers transmit on their cell phones, according to the Movement for Freedom of Information in Israel (FOIM).
However, the cellular companies - Pelephone, Cellcom, Partner and Mirs - as well as the Communications Ministry and the Prime Minister's Office, which oversees the Shin Bet, all declined to confirm the existence of such a directive. If this addendum does exist, it would potentially impair the privacy rights of millions of cell phone customers in Israel without their knowledge.
FOIM says that the security appendix "permits the security services to access citizens' communications data, including in real time, without judicial oversight or other supervision and without the citizens' knowledge.­"
"We discovered a new and surprising classification of documents that are not for public knowledge," FOIM Director Roi Peled told Haaretz. "This means that a document exists that there is no reason to keep secret, but the authorities have decided for some reason that the public must not know about it."
Peled explained that every issue indirectly touching on security is blocked to the public, without any examination of whether a real concern exists that releasing the information to the public would harm national security. "The claim that if the public knows how the security establishment works, this will endanger security, is more in keeping with the regime in East Germany than with a democratic country," he said.
In its petition, FOIM will ask the court to order the respondents to admit that such a codicil to the licensing agreements exists. "It is one thing to give the state far-reaching powers, and quite another thing to give those powers to the state and conceal it from the public," Spivak said.
FOIM received a letter from the Communications Ministry confirming that some licenses do have two security appendixes, one deemed "classified" by the Shin Bet and the other "not for public release."
"SUBMITTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION" BY John Lewis-Dickerson, Atlanta

[Harrier]

I see no problems in getting a warrant first. Money would be better spent on Interpol who is identifying a lot more terrorists than any effort domestically

[mbaty]

I switched off my verizon phone--and the sad part is that they weren't a bad phone company, except for the whole spying on us thing. If Bush can grant immunity for everyone in his cabal; if he can stop people from testifying, then perhaps we should just do away with the legal system, or at least give everyone currently involved immunity. Let the prisoners out...it's like the deficit--is it any wonder that Americans have credit card debt when our own government treats money like it's unending, borrowing more and more like it's not even real? Why don't all Americans get away with this? Let's give everyone a credit limit equivalent in proportion with the deficit...­who knows, it may never get paid back. Who cares? We'll ALL have immunity. Just like them. Oh, and then after the fact we can all write books about how horrible it was and how inside we were dying but we just couldn't say anything then.

[bepeace]

Fascism at it's finest.

[BluMoonRising]

Ahhh he fights for these for these things so hard. Does it really sound like he think he's leaving office any time soon to you? Not impeaching him was big mistake...­huge.

[Mark701]

Here's another way to look at it. Bush claims the FISA bill is critical to our national security but he's willing to veto it to protect his political donors. What a putz.

[bethinCary]

I called Sen Rockefellers' office to say I'm against immunity and that I know he takes lobby money from Telcoms.

Another Senator to primary people.

[flatus]

Hey, it can't be all that bad. He hasn't been impeached yet, has he?

Ok, then. Things are not so bad after all.

[ResidentChimp]

The companies assisting in the war against terrorism should not be held liable, especially by the terrorists.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

You're delusional if you think the government will not use this authority to spy on ANY Americans they choose.

The problem is there is no oversight. The government can do whatever it wants. Big Brother will say you're a "national security risk" or an "enemy combatant" but what does that mean? Once you've been labeled the former, you have no rights to a trial by jury.

Watch Enemy of the State.

[thatvisionthing]

Oversight, nah.

Overlook, yeah.

[bethinCary]

Actually it is not only Dems who are complicit.
Glen Greenwald has article up today about the new FISA bill writtne by Sen Rockefeller.

Turns out, Rockefeller DID put in immunity for Telecoms. (Rockefeller, a Dem, also gets a large amount of lobby money contributed by Telecoms.
Another tidbit.

Please note Hils' evasiveness about FISA.
According to opensecrets.org---Of 5 Dems out of 20 overall (the rest were GOP) she received $87,000-which was 4th on the list of highest amount of money given to a campaign.
Rockefeller gets $$$, Ben Nelson, Clyburn, Menenedez do as well-at an average of about $47,000.
"change" Much Hillary?-----not buying it.

[bumpersticker]

What we have here is a gang in the WH with all the attributes of a gang:

With or against us.
Our territory cannot be breached.
Our territory must be increased.
We offer protection to those who help us.
We make the rules.
Loyalty over truth.
The sneer.

It does no good to tell our representatives what we think unless they are willing to go to the mat against the Bush gang, and they are apparently cowards.

The Bush administration is understood in terms of adolescent testoterone values of West Side Story, except people really bleed, die, and there's no romance or music in their gangland drama.

[sadonaus]

So... How do we stop them? I keep calling and writing my congressman and they never ackowledge my existence.

[ConnieInCleveland]

I'll bet if you ask anyone who has been CONVICTED of a crime, they would have prefered immunity. Doesn't mean they should, or would get it. The old saying, 'IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THE TIME, DON'T COMMIT THE CRIME' comes to mind. Too late! They should not be discussing immunity, they should be preparing for their trial! UNDER OATH! Can Bush pardon himself?