Voting on the FISA Bill

The Senate has voted on the key amendments to the FISA and they have failed.

Dodd's amendment to strip Title II--the immunity provisions fails 32-66.
Specter's amendment to limit retroactive immunity fails, 37-61.
Bingaman's amendment that would delay the immunity until an Inspector General's report is completed fails 42-56.

If you are as upset as I am about our elected officials deciding to protect telecom companies over the constitution, help fight back against these actions. Blue America has been leading the way to fight for our rights and to elect new candidates that will uphold the constitution.

George Washington University Law proffessor Jonathan Turley discusses the FISA bill on last night's Countdown.

Why FISA Matters

The Senate will be voting on the FISA capitulation bill today.

Glenn Greenwald explains what Congress is about to do and why FISA matters to everyone.

They are taking away from the judiciary the power to adjudicate allegations of lawbreaking. They are creating a two-tiered system of justice in which our most powerful corporations can break the law with impunity and government officials remain immune from consequences. And they are, in unity, spewing rank propaganda to the commoners -- who continue to be subjected to the harsh punishment for violations of the law and one of the world's most merciless justice systems -- in order to convince them that granting license to our political and corporate elites to break the law is necessary for their own Good and for their Safety.

If you feel strongly about this please call Sen. Harkin at (202) 224-3254 and Sen. Grassley at (202) 224-3744 this morning.

Tell them to vote no on any FISA bill that has telecom immunity in it and remind them they took the oath to protect the constitution and not to protect the telecom companies.

4th of July Holiday Homework

I am vacation this week in Portland, Oregon, but I am still planning on doing some blogging.

Here are some stories that are worth reading...

• Jesse Helms died. Here is a transcript of one of his campaign ads in 1950...

White people, wake up before it is too late. Do you want Negroes working beside you, your wife and your daughters, in your mills and factories? Frank Graham favors mingling of the races.

Hopefully, we can say that with Helms' passing away that it is an end of an era.

• The Democratic Strategist takes a look at the two brands of patriotism...

If conservatives tend to see patriotism as an inheritance from a glorious past, liberals often see it as the promise of a future that redeems the past.

• Over at Daily Kos, mcjoan takes a look at the Declaration of Independence and the FISA bill that the Senate will vote on next week. Included is this quote from former Sen. Frank Church from back in the 1970's...

Crisis makes it tempting to ignore the wise restraints that make men free. But each time we do so, each time the means we use are wrong, our inner strength, the strength which makes us free, is lessened.

• Speaking of FISA, Glenn Greenwald thinks Obama's current stance is worthless.
• Things are looking good for Democrats this year.

In 2004, the Democrats began the year with a 2.3 percentage point edge over the GOP. That grew to 4.0 points by March before moving in the Republican direction for the rest of the year. By Election Day in 2004, the edge for Democrats was a mere 1.6 percentage points.

In 2006, the Democrats began the year with just a 1.6 percentage point advantage. That grew to 6.1 percentage points by November.

Polls done last month show Democrats with a 9.5% advantage.

Feingold Says Thank You for Action on FISA

From True Majority...

Feingold: Telecom Immunity Could be a Cover Up of an Impeachable Offense

Sen. Russ Feingold spoke yesterday at the New America Foundation in Washington about the nation’s intelligence needs. Feingold was asked the latest FISA bill that includes immunity for telecom companies.

“I do think this is a total farce with regard to the immunity [for telecommunications companies]. It basically guarantees the immunity,” Feingold said. “It doesn’t simply have the impact of potentially allowing telephone companies to break the law. It may prevent us from ever getting to the core issue … which is the president ran an illegal program that could’ve been an impeachable offense.”

FISA Capitulation

Olbermann talks with George Washington law professor Jonathon Turley...



Rep. Tom Udall (D-NM) who is running for US Senate in New Mexico released a great statement explaining his decision to vote against the so-called compromise on FISA.

The FISA bill we considered today would compromise the constitutionally guaranteed rights that make America a beacon of hope around the world.

Today's vote was not easy. I stood up to leaders of my own party and voted against this bill, because I took an oath to defend Americans and our Constitution, and it was the right thing to do.

That duty is most important when it is most difficult. We can protect our nation while upholding our values, but unfortunately, this bill falls short.

Feingold and Dodd on the FISA Cave In

Yesterday, Sen. Russ Feingold released a statement about the Democratic leadership caving in on the FISA to allow Telecom immunity.

The proposed FISA deal is not a compromise; it is a capitulation. The House and Senate should not be taking up this bill, which effectively guarantees immunity for telecom companies alleged to have participated in the President’s illegal program, and which fails to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans at home. Allowing courts to review the question of immunity is meaningless when the same legislation essentially requires the court to grant immunity. And under this bill, the government can still sweep up and keep the international communications of innocent Americans in the U.S. with no connection to suspected terrorists, with very few safeguards to protect against abuse of this power. Instead of cutting bad deals on both FISA and funding for the war in Iraq, Democrats should be standing up to the flawed and dangerous policies of this administration.

And from Sen. Chris Dodd...

I cannot support the so-called ‘compromise’ legislation announced today. This bill would not hold the telecommunications companies that participated in the President’s warrantless wiretapping program accountable for their actions. Instead, it would simply offer retroactive immunity by another name.

“As I have said time and time again, the President should not be above the rule of law, nor should the telecommunications companies who supported his quest to spy on American citizens. I remain strongly opposed to this deeply flawed bill, and I urge my colleagues in Congress to join me in supporting American’s civil liberties by rejecting this measure.”

Boswell and Blue Dogs Revolt, Democrats Cave on FISA to Allow Telecom Immunity

A compromise has been reached in Congress on the FISA bill. The so-called compromise bascially allows immunity to Telecom Companies for illegally spying on Americans.

The agreement would also pave the way for companies such as AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. to shed the nearly 40 lawsuits they face for allegedly participating in a prior version of the NSA program, which have cast a shadow over their reputation on Wall Street and Main Street. To win immunity, they would have to pass review from a U.S. District Court.

It faces hurdles to becoming law, namely whether it will have enough support from other lawmakers in both parties in the House. Telecommunications companies, which have lobbied lawmakers aggressively in recent weeks, support the compromise as does the White House.

Critical to sealing the deal was a compromise that would grant conditional immunity to telecommunications companies for assistance they provided from September 2001 through January 2007. If the companies can show a federal district court judge "substantial evidence" they received a written request from the attorney general or head of an intelligence agency stating the president authorized the surveillance and determined it to be lawful, the cases against them will be dismissed.

Yesterday the New York Times had an editorial saying this agreement is unnecessary and a threat to the Bill of Rights.

This week, the White House and Democratic and Republican leaders on Capitol Hill hope to announce a “compromise” on a domestic spying bill. If they do, it will be presented as an indispensable tool for protecting the nation’s security that still safeguards our civil liberties. The White House will paint opponents as weak-kneed liberals who do not understand and cannot stand up to the threat of terrorism.

The bill is not a compromise. The final details are being worked out, but all indications are that many of its provisions are both unnecessary and a threat to the Bill of Rights. The White House and the Congressional Republicans who support the bill have two real aims. They want to undermine the power of the courts to review the legality of domestic spying programs. And they want to give a legal shield to the telecommunications companies that broke the law by helping Mr. Bush carry out his warrantless wiretapping operation.

Democratic leadership in the House has caved on this bill because a handful of Blue Dog Democrats, including Iowa's Leonard Boswell.

A potential revolt by a group of Democrats pressed party leaders into compromising on a rewrite of electronic surveillance rules that could come to a House vote by week’s end, a top Democrat said Wednesday.

The House will vote on this tomorrow. If you live in Iowa's 3rd district, call Leonard Boswell and tell Telecom companies should not get immunity for breaking the law and ask him to vote against this bill.

Rep. Leonard L. Boswell, D-Iowa -- Phone: (202) 225-3806

Boswell's Change of Heart

A week ago, I wrote about an upcoming vote on the FISA and telecom immunity, saying that it was a moment of truth for Leonard Boswell.

I thought I should update on how Boswell voted on the issue. After calling for telecom immunity in a January 28th letter to Nancy Pelosi, Boswell flipped on the issue and ended up voting against telecom immunity and siding with the majority of Democrats and against the Bush administration and corporate interests.

This marks the 3rd time that Boswell has flipped on an issue since rumors of Ed Fallon challenging him began last last year. In December, Boswell voted, for the first time, against a war funding bill that didn't include a date for withdrawal. Then in February, Boswell was a late sponsor to a bill that would seek to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney. Now, Boswell votes against immunity for telecom companies.

These are all great developments and I would like thank Rep. Boswell for voting with the majority of his Democratic colleagues and standing up for the wishes of his constituents.

This change of heart on the part of Boswell is the exact reason why a primary challenge is beneficial.

Boswell's Moment of Truth

At this very moment the House is voting on an updating FISA legislaton. At stake is immunity for telecom companies for participating in illegal wiretapping of American citizens. Bush and Republicans have been trying to strike up fear while defending retroactive immunity for telecom companies, while the other side is defending the rule of law and sticking up for the Constitution.

The way Leonard Boswell votes on this bill will be very telling. On January 28th, Boswell was one of 21 Blue Dog Democrats that wrote a letter to Nancy Pelosi urging her to include immunity for telecom companies. Adding to that, Boswell has received money from telecommunications PACs including $5,000 from AT&T.

However, the net roots has been putting pressure on these 21 Blue Dogs, and Boswell is in the middle of a tough primary race with Ed Fallon. Boswell has flipped on a number progressive issues since it came clear that Fallon would be challenging him. The question is if Boswell will flip again?

Shielding Telecoms from any Responsibility

The Houston Chronicle summarizes the debate on terrorist surveillance, domestic spying, and telecom immunity...

What this dispute is really about is shielding telecoms from any responsibility for enabling surveillance of customers that might have violated their constitutional rights to privacy.

It's understandable that Bush would want to prevent court scrutiny of a potentially illegal spying program that operated outside the law for so long. But the administration is putting the protection of corporations and partisan posturing above the constitutional rights of the American people.

But they might not want to break the law in the future

That is the reason George Bush gave for granting telecom immunity at a press conference this morning.

You can't expect the phone companies to participate if they feel that they are going to be sued... How can you listen to the enemy if the phone companies aren't going to participate with you?

This article from the Economist responds to this claim...

How are you going to listen? Well, presumably by way of lawful court orders or emergency certifications, as authorised under the old FISA statute, and now also on the independent authority of the attorney-general and director of national intelligence even without a court order, assuming some version of those expanded powers eventually passes. When surveillance is conducted pursuant to the law, there is no question of whether telecom firms will "cooperate" or "participate", like children at day camp. They will comply, and they will do it because they are required to.

The worry about "participation" makes sense only if you anticipate asking these companies to turn over information outside the law, without a court order or any statutory authority. But that is precisely why we have laws establishing penalties for unauthorised data disclosure: To deter them from helping the government to circumvent the law. If you think they should help the government circumvent the law, then it seems you ought to stop poncing about with ad hoc amnesties and simply do away with the data disclosure statues, at least as they apply to information sharing with intelligence agencies.

Upholding the Constitution

Fallon Opposes Telecom Immunity While Boswell Takes Their Money

Ed Fallon is in favor of tracking down terrorists. However, he isn't in favor of immunity for telecom comapanies who knowingly broke the law.

I am opposed to giving immunity to the telecom companies. This is an area where Boswell has repeatedly sided with Bush and against his fellow House Democrats, as when he voted for the Protect America Act and the reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act. I am critical of his record because I believe such legislation is too sweeping in granting new police powers to the government and, as a result, infringes on the civil rights and liberties of Americans.

Boswell on the other hand likes the telecom companies because they help fund his campaign. AT&T gave Boswell $5,000 in donations last year.

So how does Boswell repay these telecom companies? He writes a letter to Democratic leadership in the House saying that he will side with the Republicans and Bush and won't vote for telecom immunity.