Wednesday, August 08, 2007

The battle of backbone in the House and Senate for the FISA bill.







Click to enlarge.



This are the names of Senators that voted for the S1927 bill. This bill went to the Senate first and overwhelmly passed and then it went to the House. Bush knew that he had to have the Senate to pass this bill which made it differcult for Congress. Few still stood their ground while others on both sides cave in to King George.



From the Jurist:



The US Senate on Friday passed the Protect America Act 2007 [S 1927 materials], under which the Executive Branch would be given expanded surveillance authority for a period of six months while Congress worked on long-term legislation to "modernize" the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The bill establishes legal guidelines of how the United States can conduct surveillance against foreign nationals "reasonably believed to be outside the United States," and requires the director of national intelligence and the attorney general's authorization before surveillance against a specific target can begin. The surveillance will be subject to review by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court within 120 days.


Bush thanked the Senate for "the hard work they did to find common ground," and urged the House to adopt a bill similar to the Senate version Saturday.


And here is the turnmoil in the House from the Senate passing the bill.


From Truthout:


Complaints From Levin


Some House Democrats said privately that they believed the Senate "cut us off at the knees" by sending over a bill favored by the administration, making it difficult for House Democrats to fight against the president and congressional Republicans by themselves.


The cleared measure would permit warrantless surveillance of any targets located abroad, even if they are communicating with someone in the United States. That expansion alone has infuriated privacy advocacy groups and segments of the Democrats' base.


Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, who cosponsored the unsuccessful Democratic counterproposal (S 2011) to the McConnell-Bond measure, said the Republican bill went even further, allowing eavesdropping, without court review, on U.S. citizens who happen to be located on foreign soil.


"It says if Americans are overseas, they're basically fair game," Levin said.


The Center for Democracy and Technology agreed with Levin in its analysis of the bill, noting that the legislation allows warrantless surveillance of all foreign targets.


The authority provided by the measure would be broader than Bush said his Terrorist Surveillance Program had when he acknowledged its existence after its disclosure by the media in December 2005.


"The president said then that in every case, the administration had reason to believe that a member or associate of al Qaeda or another terrorist group was on the line," the privacy advocacy group wrote Aug. 2.


"The administration's latest proposal eliminates that requirement. It would allow interception of any international call of any citizen, just on the basis that the government is targeting the person overseas."


The legislation does add a layer of oversight from the secret court that administers warrants under FISA. It requires the attorney general, in consultation with the director of National Intelligence, to develop procedures for handling information collected through the surveillance to ensure that it is directed only at foreign targets. The court could approve or disapprove of the procedures.


But the Center for Democracy and Technology said a clause in the legislation allowing the court to reject the procedures only if they were "clearly erroneous" was a "ridiculously low" standard and was not the most important thing to examine anyway.


"The question should be whether the surveillance is resulting in the interception of the communications of Americans," the center wrote. "If it is, it should be subject to a court order. Under the administration proposal, the court has no authority to examine that question and therefore no authority to protect the rights of Americans."


The bill also would compel communications carriers to comply with the federal government's surveillance demands.


The legislation would expire after six months, giving Congress a chance to revisit the controversy and address a more long-lasting FISA overhaul in the fall. Some Democrats said that is why they voted for the bill despite their concerns. Others said they merely wanted to vote for legislation that had the best chance of passing to quickly clear the intelligence gap.


Heather A. Wilson, R-N.M., an Intelligence panel member who has been at the forefront of her party's efforts to clear a FISA overhaul bill, said Democrats have begun to see that "we're not kidding" that the threat posed by gaps in the law is serious.


Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, the ranking Republican on the committee, joined Wilson in pressing for the bill. He said Bush was prepared to sign the measure as soon as the House cleared it.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080707S.shtml


No comments: