Exclusive capitulation report: House Democratic leadership circulates FISA bill

[CTuttle]

Source: Salon

As has been expected for a week now, the House Democratic leadership has prepared and is now currently circulating (while trying very hard to keep it confidential) their so-called "compromise" FISA bill. Their soon-to-be-unveiled bill, unsurprisingly, is designed to give the White House exactly what it has demanded, with only the smallest and most inconsequential changes.

The current draft does not contain telecom immunity (solely for temporary strategic reasons -- see below), but incorporates every substantive warrantless surveillance provision of the Rockefeller/Cheney bill passed by the Senate, with several small and worthless exceptions that they'll try to sell to what they obviously think is their stupid base as some vital "concessions":

* The House bill has a 4 year-sunset provision rather than the Senate's 6 years;

* It provides for an audit by the DOJ's Inspector General of the "Terrorist Surveillance Program" (the only change that I would describe as something other than worthless);

* It contains a provision stating that the bill is the "exclusive means" by which the President can conduct electronic surveillance (the same provision that FISA has now which the President violated, and which the Senate refused to insert into its bill); Nancy Pelosi was trying just yesterday, lamely, to sell this provision as some sort of vital safeguard;

* The bill mandates some minimal re-review of some of the provisions in 2009; and,

* It contains some mild changes to some of the definitions (the specifics of which I don't know).

The plan of the House leadership is to pass this specific bill in the House, send it to the Senate (where telecom immunity will be added in by the same bipartisan Senate faction that already voted for immunity), have it go back to the House for an up-or-down-vote on the House-bill-plus-telecom-immunity (which will pass with the support of the Blue Dogs), and then compliantly sent on to a happy and satisfied President, who will sign the bill that he demanded.

Read more: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/03/07/house_fisa/index.html

---

Time to call our House Critters...

[CTuttle]

1. Here's an excellent resource to contact them...

http://www.votesmart.org/official_congress.php?dist=bio.php :bounce: :bounce: :kick: :bounce: :bounce:

[katty]

2. of course, can't say no to little boy-ever!

[pleah]

3. You can't let your guard down for a second with these criminals.

[cal04]

4. UPDATE, Update 2 and a post from TPM

UPDATE: Former Dodd campaign blogger Matt Browner Hamlin, who was instrumental in Dodd's efforts to stop telecom immunity, adds his thoughts here. And Matt Stoller notes once again the lack of leadership from presidential candidates (as opposed to fine-sounding statements) on these issues.

This report was based on unimpeachable sources close to the whole process. I'm getting a little bit of pushback already from others claiming that the plan and strategy of the House Democratic leadership is more nuanced than what I've described, and that the bill they will promote is better (the statement: "A House aide disputes both the specifics of the draft and the presumed strategy"). I'll be happy if that's true (though I doubt it), and hopefully, the fact that there's pushback at all means this is still a vibrant, ongoing process that can be affected. I'll be happy to add any statements, denials and the like.

FDL has contact information up for Chairman Reyes and Speaker Pelosi. It is here. At the very least, it can't hurt to contact them and share your views on what they're doing.
http://firedoglake.com/2008/03/07/lets-hit-the-phones-and-faxes/

UPDATE II: Denials of this report from various House aides -- including some I trust -- are both numerous and emphatic. At the same time, I've received additional confirmation from other House sources who are credible. Under these circumstances -- where the House leadership works completely in the dark, excluding even key allies; the process is still dynamic; and various credible sources provide conflicting accounts -- it's difficult to sort out exactly what they're doing.

Time will tell, and shortly. Virtually everyone expects the House leadership's approach to be unveiled this upcoming week. We'll see whether this report is inaccurate, and if so, whether it's inaccurate in small details or if the gist is wrong. One fact that doesn't seem in dispute: Jay Rockefeller has been the principal impediment, refusing to concede any meaningful point.

Details aside, is there anyone left who expects this process to end, and quickly, with something other than a bill being sent to the White House that contains the Rockefeller/Cheney warrantless eavesdropping and telecom amnesty provisions?


House Dems Circulate Draft of Surveillance Compromise
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/house_dems_circulate_draft_of.php

[wryter2000]

5. I've faxed Reyes twice

I hope some of what I said got through to someone.

[CTuttle]

7. I'm thrilled about Dodd considering to filibuster...

Pow Wow posted this on pg. 5 of the comments to Glenn's Post...


"P.S. Chris Dodd has promised to continue his opposition to a flawed ‘conference committee’ product. Note that his ability to block such a product dramatically improves shortly before a Congressional recess, which will be the case next week (it’s the last week of work before Congress takes at least a couple of weeks off). He may not have to filibuster next week (but instead simply object to Unanimous Consent requests) to successfully push any final action and seriously-taxing filibuster off until after the upcoming recess."

Check out the entire comment... Well worth the read!

:kick:

[gulfcoastliberal]

6. Gotta keep the 'ol powder dry! Don't wanna look tough against the pugs!

Especially not in an election year for crying out loud! :sarcasm:

[crimsonblue]

8. I think this is actually MORE important than immunity...

I think Bushco have pulled a great switcheroo on us. Last summer, the uproar was over the PAA itself, with little talk about immunity. I find it to be more important that the government not spy on me than that the Telecoms see the inside of a courtroom (although they will never pay out a dime!). Bushco has successfully diverted our attention from the PAA to immunity, so that they can slip their warrantless spying by us with none the wiser. People seem to forget, but not long ago, most democrats thought FISA to severely limit civil liberties, but now it is acceptable? As democrats waste time futilely opposing immunity, the Repugs have successfully and quietly slid the issue of civil liberties rightward. To me, the price you pay for a legitimate democracy is that random acts will occur. They just will, because you can't plan for every contigency. To act like you can moves you on a path to totalitarianism. There may be peace in a totalitarian state, but at the sacrifice of the liberties that our forefathers fought against their friends and brothers for. We must not abandon our freedoms, because then there is nothing left to protect. One last thing, the immunity issue won't matter ultimately because if push comes to shove, Bush will simply grant blanket immunity for everyone involved in warrantless wiretapping.

[CTuttle]

9. I can't argue that...

I'd like it to revert back to the '95 revision of FISA! I don't like the RESTORE, PAA, or this piece of crap legislation...!:banghead:

[snot]

10. WHAT WILL IT TAKE -- DO WE HAVE TO PROMISE TO BRIBE THEM TO REP US?

I'm actually half serious. I've written and phoned all my reps so many times on this issue. But what I haven't done is say, I PROMISE YOU I WILL GIVE YOU ____$$$ IF YOU WILL SIMPLY CARRY OUT MY WISHES.

That is, after all, what we're up against.

And maybe it'll embarrass them into representing us?