Be INFORMED

Friday, January 25, 2008

FISA Intel Committee Report Has A Flaw But Will Dodd Confront It?

  We all know about the battle going on in the Senate over the FISA Bill and it's telecom immunity provision which Bush wants in the bill so that his sorry ass will be covered once again  for breaking the law.

Packerland progressive, by way of the DailyKos, takes  a look at one way in which Dodd and Feingold could stop this lame excuse for a bill bead in it's tracks. Can you say " Point of Order "? This FISA Bill has some flaws in it which can be exploited in order to make this bill DOA.
Packerland progressive :...I wanted to spend a diary highlighting what appears to be a fatal procedural flaw in the "Committee Report" which represents the Intelligence Committee's version (i.e., the bad bill providing Telco amnesty).  Why does it matter?  Because it creates one more way for Dodd, Feingold, and (whoever else steps up to protect the constitution) to stop this thing dead in its tracks on the Senate floor.

When a Committee reports out a bill to the Senate floor, it prepares a committee report, describing present law, how the proposed legislation would change present law, and the reasons the Committee recommends making such changes to the law.  And what the above rule says is that, as part of that review, the Committee is supposed to evaluate the impact the proposed change would have on individuals and businesses, including "a determination of the impact on the personal privacy of the individuals affected."

And one would almost think that the FISA legislation is the poster child for such a rule, requiring the Committee with jurisdiction to evaluate and report to the full Senate its analysis of how the legislation would impact personal privacy.  One might almost think that such an evaluation would be perhaps the single most important thing the Intelligence Committee should have been doing in the course of its markup of the Bill. So, what does the Regulatory Impact Statement of the Committee Report (Senate Report 110-209) say on this matter?

EVALUATION OF REGULATORY IMPACT
In accordance with paragraph 11(b)(2) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee deems it impractical to evaluate in this report the regulatory impact of provisions of this bill due to the classified nature of the operations conducted pursuant to this legislation.   DailyKos

  This is where both Dodd and Feingold have the upper hand. Since the impact on personal privacy was never done by the committee, Dodd and/or Feingold can call for a point of order, pointing out that things were not done by the Senate rules. This bill then goes nowhere until things are done in the proper manner.

  You can just hear all of the crying and howling and screaming going on if Dodd/Feingold do the right thing on this matter.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Will Bush Get Amnesty For The Teleco's In The FISA Bill?

  Let us hope not as this would open a door for you and I that we do not want opened. I do not want to be spied on by my government and I seriously doubt that you do. Our representatives in the Senate shouldn't even be considering granting amnesty to the phone companies ( ATT,Verizon,ect.) for handing over you and I's phone call records or our emails. Amnesty to these jerks not only lets them off of the hook for doing something that is illegal, but, it lets our Dumb-ass In Chief ( Bush ) and his crime family off of the hook also.

   mcjoan at DailyKos has an interesting look at Bush and the phone companies in light of the FISA bill.

The news that the telcos pulled their wiretaps because the weren't getting paid reveals two truths: the telcos aren't great patriots doing their duty for national security--they're greedy and willing to break the law if they can boost the bottom line; the Bush administration doesn't care enough about national security to pay the freaking bill for it and is using this issue as yet another bludgeon to beat up on Democrats.

Too many times we've seen the Dems capitulate at the mere threat of that bludgeon. It doesn't need to happen again, because that fear is baseless. Consider this recently release poll commissioned by the ACLU, (via Greenwald):

Majorities of voters on both sides of the political spectrum oppose key provisions in President Bush's proposal to modify foreign surveillance laws that could ensnare Americans, according to a poll released Tuesday.

The survey shows nearly two-thirds of poll respondents say the government should be required to get an individual warrant before listening in on conversations between US citizens and people abroad. Close to six in 10 people oppose an administration proposal to allow intelligence agencies to seek "blanket warrants" that would let them eavesdrop of foreigners for up to a year no additional judicial oversight required if the foreign suspect spoke to an American. And  a majority are against a plan to give legal immunity to telecommunications companies that facilitated the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping.

"Across the board, we find opposition to the administration's FISA agenda," pollster Mark Mellman said Tuesday.

Last month, we generated over half a million calls and e-mails to Senate offices in support of Senator Dodd's filibuster of telco amnesty. We need to double that number this week. We need to tell our Senators that we stand with the majority of Americans in opposition to amnesty, and they should be more afraid of us voters than of a lame duck, failing president.

Particularly, those calls need to go to our presidential candidates. Again, Greenwald has details:

The three leading recipients of telecom money for this election cycle are, unsurprisingly, the three sitting Senators running for President (with two Democratic members who are key to amnesty -- Jay Rockefeller and Rahm Emanuel -- close behind). That's how "Washington works" -- the process they are all pledging to battle and change. Needless to say, all of the viable GOP presidential candidates will be blindly supportive of whatever surveillance powers and lawbreaking immunity the President demands, but thus far, Obama and (less emphatically) Clinton have both claimed that they oppose such measures and thus pledged to support a Dodd-led filibuster.

Clinton and Obama have reiterated that opposition this week in response to Markos's inquiries. But the Senators need to do more than issue statements. They need to take a break from their campaigns and spend a few days actually on the job that they currently have--that means physically standing with Chris Dodd in support of his filibuster. You can urge them to do that with this page set up by Working Assets. Matt Browner-Hamlin has more on that campaign.

  Needless to say, you should  call and e-mail your Senators and tell them NO IMMUNITY for the telocom's.