Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Feinstein Buckles to Grassroots Pressure, FISA Bill Passes Without Telecom Immunity

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:07 AM
Original message
Feinstein Buckles to Grassroots Pressure, FISA Bill Passes Without Telecom Immunity
http://alternet.org/blogs/peek/68114/#more

Feinstein Buckles to Grassroots Pressure, FISA Bill Passes Without Telecom Immunity

Posted by Howie Klein, Down With Tyranny! at 5:52 AM on November 16, 2007.

Howie Klein: Bush's main Democratic ally on the Senate Judiciary Committee, grudgingly voted for a bill that doesn't allow for retroactive immunity.

This post, written by Howie Klein, originally appeared on Down With Tyranny!


Earlier this evening the House passed by a vote of 227-189 a bill that would strengthen court oversight of government surveillanceand refused the Bush Regime's and their Republican rubber stamp allies' demands that law breakers inside the big telecom corporations be granted retroactive immunity for criminal behavior. Bush, of course, has vowed to veto the bill. He may not have to.

Obstructionists in the Senate are determined to kill the bill in the Senate. Today they suffered a mini-setback when Dianne Feinstein, Bush's main Democratic ally on the Senate Judiciary Committee, grudgingly voted for a bill that doesn't allow for retroactive immunity. Corporate hacks like Mitch McConnell (R-KY) went bonkers and are promising to filibuster it. Just so you don't get the idea that Feinstein has seen the light, just before she voted to allow the bill without the retroactive immunity go to the ful Senate, she had voted against Russ Feingold's amendment to specifically kill retroactive immunity.

Just minutes before the vote, the committee had voted 11-to-8 in favor of immunity for the phone companies.

Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Cal., and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., voted with the nine Republicans on the panel in favor of preserving the immunity clause.

But in a strange twist that left many wondering what had happened, just minutes after this vote, Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, called for a separate vote to approve the bill without the section of the legislation with the immunity provisions.

The committee approved Leahy's call 10-9, along party lines.


So pressure on Feinstein needs to be maintained and increased. Today MoveOn joined the Courage Campaign to do this. And the Courage Campaign is not backing down and not taking any sops from Feinstein or her insider allies.

Speaker Pelosi's blog has all the details of what the House did pass and why it is important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:09 AM
Response to Original message
1. "Buckles to Grassroots Pressure" ??
How about.. "Responds to Demands of her Constituents"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robbien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
2. Exactly. DiFi stills wants to please GOPers/Bush on this
The passage of no immunity has plenty to do with grassroots action and very little/nothing to do with Congressional Dems finally doing something that is right because they want to serve the publics best interests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
3. Almost makes me believe in miracles....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:21 AM
Response to Original message
4. I guess it appears that our leaning on Dems works
we should do it more and more often.

Feinstein Buckles to Grassroots Pressure, FISA Bill Passes Without Telecom Immunity
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:21 AM
Response to Original message
5. I've seen conflicting reports... that Leahy unilaterally decided
to strip it out before sending from the committee. So, I'll wait for confirmation before I'll give Feinstein any credit....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Bravo Patrick Leahy
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. I'm not giving her any credit; she 'buckled' and did nothing willingly.
But I'll be looking for confirmation, or a different pov.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
8. Here's the nitty-gritty details from Pelosi's blog:
http://www.speaker.gov/legislation?id=0105

The RESTORE Act of 2007

On November 15th, the House passed the RESTORE Act of 2007 (Responsible Electronic Surveillance That is Overseen, Reviewed, and Effective), H.R. 3773. This bill updates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to provide meaningful and flexible surveillance tools for the intelligence community, while protecting the constitutional rights of Americans whose communications may be intercepted in the process. In August, Congress enacted a temporary FISA revisions bill (the Protect America Act; PL 110-55), which expires in February 2008 and was opposed by 181 House Democrats. The “self-executing” rule provides that a manager’s amendment shall be considered as adopted upon adoption of the rule. Following are highlights of the manager’s amendment and of the bill.

The Manager’s Amendment

The rule provides that the manager’s amendment shall be considered as adopted upon adoption of the rule. Key provisions of the manager’s amendment include:

* Clarifies that nothing in the bill shall be construed to prohibit lawful surveillance necessary to:
o Prevent Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, or any other terrorist organization from attacking the U.S., any U.S. person, or any ally of the U.S.;
o Ensure the safety and security of our Armed Forces or other national security or intelligence personnel;
o Protect the U.S., any U.S. person, or any U.S. ally from the threat of WMD or any other threats to national security.
* Clarifies that the bill shall not be construed to prohibit surveillance of, or grant any rights to, undocumented aliens.
* Provides that NSA and other agencies can only disseminate identifying information of a U.S. person to other government agencies if a Senior Executive determines that such dissemination is necessary to understand the value of the intelligence and to protect national security.
* Establishes criteria for the FISA Court to determine whether the targeting procedures for ensuring that surveillance is reasonably designed to target only people outside the United States sufficiently protect U.S. person communications intercepted by the NSA.


The Bill

Authorizes surveillance program, while protecting innocent Americans’ rights. This bill provides a mechanism, through December 2009, to conduct foreign electronic surveillance for the purpose of defending against terrorism and other national security threats, without the need for individual court orders for overseas targets, while protecting the constitutional rights of Americans whose communications may be intercepted in the process.

Is tough on terrorists. The bill does not extend Fourth Amendment protections to overseas targets such as Osama bin Laden and other members of terrorist organizations. It also closes any “foreign-to-foreign” ambiguity by making it clear that purely foreign-to-foreign communications do not require a court order even when the communication transits the U.S. or when the acquisition is in the United States. This clarification is needed because some communications between foreign persons located overseas pass through routing stations here in the United States.

Gives intelligence community flexibility while mandating meaningful judicial review. In circumstances where there is a reasonable likelihood that surveillance against terrorists and other security threats will acquire Americans’ communications, the RESTORE Act provides that such surveillance be conducted under rules reviewed and approved by the FISA court. The bill grants the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and the Attorney General authority to apply to the FISA court for a single court order (sometimes referred to as a “basket” court order) authorizing surveillance of a suspected terrorist organization abroad or other foreign power for up to one year, so long as there are reasonable procedures in place to ensure that only foreigners are targeted and Americans’ rights are preserved. The officials could also apply for one-year extensions of such court orders. Each order would apply to a group of suspected foreign terrorists. The Administration can seek as many orders as it wants.

Ensures that individual court orders for foreign terrorists are not needed. In endorsing this bill, the Washington Post editorial (10/14/07) points out that the bill ensures that individual court orders for terrorists abroad are not needed: “The measure produced by the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees would alleviate the burden of obtaining individualized warrants while still maintaining a critical oversight role for the FISA court. Instead of having to seek warrants on a case-by-case basis, intelligence agencies would be able to obtain programmatic orders from the court for such surveillance programs. However, the FISA court would have to approve the procedures under which surveillance is conducted – specifically, to ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place to protect the privacy of Americans whose communications with foreigners happen to be intercepted.”

Bolsters the FISA court’s oversight role, designed to protect innocent Americans’ rights. Under the bill, in reviewing applications for court orders, the FISA court would review and approve the following: 1) the government’s so-called “minimization procedures” to lessen the aggregation and retention of sensitive information about U.S. citizens; 2) the targeting procedures to ensure that surveillance is reasonably designed to target only people outside the United States; and 3) the guidelines to ensure that if a target becomes a person in the United States for whom collection requires a court order, an individualized order will be sought.

Provides for initial emergency period, to ensure no critical information goes uncollected. Under the bill, the DNI and the Attorney General would be authorized to conduct electronic surveillance for up to 45 days in an “emergency situation” if certain criteria are met.

Clarifies ambiguous language in Protect America Act on warrantless domestic searches. The bill clarifies and eliminates ambiguous language in the Protect America Act that appeared to authorize warrantless searches inside the United States, including physical searches of American homes, offices, computers, and medical records.

Restates current law stipulating that surveillance targeting Americans requires an individualized court order. The bill restates current law requiring an individualized court order from the FISA court when the electronic surveillance is targeting persons in the United States (defined as U.S. citizens and persons lawfully admitted for permanent residence.)

Requires regular audits and reports. The bill requires regular audits by the Justice Department Inspector General on communications collected under this authority and the number of U.S. persons identified in intelligence reports disseminated pursuant to this collection. These audits would be provided to the FISA court and to Congress.

Also requires an audit of the President’s warrantless surveillance programs. The bill also requires an audit and a report to Congress on the President’s Terrorist Surveillance Program and other warrantless surveillance programs.

Mandates record keeping. The bill mandates record keeping on any interception of the communications of U.S. persons.

Adds resources for FISA. The bill adds funding for personnel and technology resources at the FISA court and other government agencies responsible for making and processing FISA applications, to ensure that applications can be handled expeditiously.

Reiterates the exclusivity of FISA. The bill includes the House-passed bipartisan Schiff-Flake language that reiterates that FISA is the exclusive means to conduct electronic surveillance of Americans for the purpose of foreign intelligence collection.

Sunsets in December 2009. The bill sunsets on December 31, 2009 – allowing the Congress to examine how the surveillance authority granted in the bill has been used and what adjustments need to be made. The bill provides for a transition from the existing court orders under the Protect America Act (PL 110-55) to the new ones to ensure that the intelligence community does not go “dark” on any surveillance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
9. HEADLINE: "FEINSTEIN CROSSES THE AISLE TO VOTE WITH DEMOCRATS ON FISA"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Gawd. How pathetic is that, but true! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
11. It's a sad day when a Democrat has to be pressured to behave like a ..... Democrat.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:39 AM
Response to Original message
12. well... i guess her husband didnt have a $27,000,000 interest in that bill
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
13. She "grudgingly" voted for the bill without immunity--GAWD, Dianne, that must have KILLED you
to side with your own party, you corrupt old skank.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
14. WHAT! The people were actually represented?
How is that buckling?

Thank you, Senator, for doing the right thing! I'm sure it hurt like hell!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 10:03 AM
Response to Original message
15. We won one? WOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
16. Actually, a Bush ally might report a bill out w/o immunity to provide a veto excuse
The real TRUTH behind the Republican DECEIT on the FISA debate and the VETO threat.
In effect, this is a law requiring Bush to report his own crimes :rofl:

Why are Bush and the Rs really in a tizzy? Why the veto threat, and why is team-player Mukasey taking the fall for the veto idea.
Because the House Version passed today "Requires an Audit of the President’s Surveillance Program and Other Warrantless Surveillance Programs"

MORE: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2294411
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lunatica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
17. Feinstein likes to work in the dark
She's just pretending to be a Democrat and her buckling is nothing more than self-protection. As soon as the public find out what she does she always backs off. For example, she used to be on some committee having to do with military spending but quit when it was found out that she was stearing business towards her husband and forcing the military to do business with him or risk losing money. She prefers to publicly look and sound like a Democrat but privately look after her financial interests a la republican way. Keeping the spotlight on her is the way to go because she's just like all the other usual suspects you find when you pick up a rock.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fenriswolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
18. so now all we have to do is bring up the telecoms
on charges and once that is done bring up the wh for warrantless wiretapping.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC