House passes new surveillance law
WASHINGTON (AP) - June 20, 2008 The bill, which was passed on a 293-129 vote, does more than
just protect the telecoms. The update to the 30-year-old Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act is an attempt to balance privacy
rights with the government's responsibility to protect the country
against attack, taking into account changes in telecommunications
technologies.
"This bill, though imperfect, protects both," said Rep. Jane
Harman, D-Calif., and a former member of the House intelligence
committee.
President Bush praised the bill Friday. "It will help our
intelligence professionals learn enemies' plans for new attacks,"
he said in a statement before television cameras a few hours before
the vote.
The House's passage of the FISA Amendment bill marks the
beginning of the end to a monthslong standoff between Democrats and
Republicans about the rules for government wiretapping inside the
United States. The Senate was expected to pass the bill with a
large margin, perhaps as soon as next week, before Congress takes a
break during the week of the Fourth of July.
The government eavesdropped on American phone and computer lines
for almost six years after the Sept. 11 attacks without permission
from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the special panel
established for that purpose under the 1978 law. Some 40 lawsuits
have been filed against the telecommunications companies by groups
and individuals who think the Bush administration illegally
monitored their phone calls or e-mails.
The White House had threatened to veto any surveillance bill
that did not also shield the companies.
The compromise bill directs a federal district court to review
certifications from the attorney general saying the
telecommunications companies received presidential orders telling
them wiretaps were needed to detect or prevent a terrorist attack.
If the paperwork were deemed in order, the judge would dismiss the
lawsuit.
It would also require the inspectors general of the Justice
Department, Pentagon and intelligence agencies to investigate the
wiretapping program, with a report due in a year.
Critics of the bill say dismissal is a foregone conclusion.
"These provisions turn the judiciary into the administration's
rubber stamp," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif. She opposes the
bill.
Opponents of immunity believe civil lawsuits are the only way
the full extent of the wiretapping program will ever be revealed.
Key senators voiced strong opposition to the compromise,
although they're unlikely to have the votes to either defeat or
filibuster the bill. Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the top
Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, condemned the
immunity deal. He said that nothing in the new bill would prevent
the government from once again wiretapping domestic phone and
computer lines without court permission.
Specter said the problem is constitutional: The White House may
still assert that the president's Article II powers as commander in
chief supersede statutes that would limit him actions.
"Only the courts can decide that issue and this proposal dodges
it," Specter said.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi of California disputed that,
saying FISA would from now on be the authority for the government
to conduct electronic surveillance.
"There is no inherent authority of the president to do whatever
he wants. This is a democracy, not a monarchy," she said.
Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate for president, said
in a statement that the compromise accepted by the House was an
improvement over the bill he had opposed last year.
"Under this compromise legislation, an important tool in the
fight against terrorism will continue, but the president's illegal
program of warrantless surveillance will be over," Obama said.
"It is not all that I would want. But given the legitimate threats
we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with
appropriate safeguards is too important to delay."
Some civil liberties and privacy groups are also opposing the
bill. They object not only to the immunity provision but to what
they consider the weakening of the FISA court's oversight of
government eavesdropping. For example, the government can initiate
a wiretap without court permission if "important intelligence"
would otherwise be lost. It has a week to file the request for
approval with the court, and the court has 30 days to act on it.
But if the court objects to how the government is carrying out the
wiretap, it could be weeks before those methods are changed or
stopped.
"What we have here is the opportunity for the government to
commit mass untargeted surveillance," said Texas Democratic Rep.
Sheila Jackson Lee.
Opponents also contend the privacy of Americans who communicate
with people overseas is not adequately protected. The bill would
allow the government to tap the foreigner's calls without court
approval, and critics contend that innocent American conversations
can be swept up in that.
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendment bill also
would:
-Require FISA court permission to wiretap Americans who are
overseas.
-Prohibit targeting a foreigner to secretly eavesdrop, without
court approval, on an American's calls or e-mails.
-Require the government to protect American information or
conversations that are collected when in communications with
targeted foreigners.
-Allow the FISA court 30 days to review existing but expiring
surveillance orders before renewing them.
-Allow eavesdropping in emergencies without court approval,
provided the government files required papers within a week.
-Prohibits the president from superseding surveillance rules in
the future.