isen.blog

If the Senate is going to let the big telephone companies off the hook for illegal spying, it will do it on Tuesday. The very fact that this is dragging on and on means that the Blogosphere is having an impact! [Have you seen much telco immunity coverage in the New York Times? Me neither!]

<egg on face>
UPDATE: NYT Editorlal 2/10/08:

. . . This whole nightmare was started by Mr. Bush’s decision to spy without warrants — not because they are hard to get, but because he decided he was above the law. Discouraging that would be a service to the nation. This debate is not about whether the United States is going to spy on Al Qaeda, it is about whether it is going to destroy its democratic principles in doing so. Senators who care about that should vote against immunity.

</egg on face>

The very best source of updata seems to be the ACLU Blog, which says in this story,

The Senate is currently moving through debate on its FISA bill. Remaining amendment votes and - the big one - final passage are expected on Tuesday. The Senate bill will then have to be reconciled with the House's RESTORE Act (which contains no immunity) by February 16. Senate Majority Leader Reid just filed for another 15-day extension to give both chambers more time to figure out a compromise. President Bush has said that he will not sign another extension, so stay tuned next week for what promises to be an interesting couple of days.

There's a very interesting letter [.pdf] that Representatives Dingell, Markey and Stupak sent yesterday urging their Senate colleagues to reject telecom immunity. It says that the President is offering Congress a false choice by tying the immunity issue to the rest of the FISA bill. It alludes to an argument apparently making the rounds that spying lawsuits would create an economic burden on the telcos -- as if it is the job of Congress to lighten the telcos load, grrrrrrrrr! It alleges that the Administration, "gagged and threatened" the telephone companies that wanted to give Congress the information it was seeking.

[In my humble opinion, there is one player who deserves retroactive immunity in this whole mess -- Joe Nacchio! He was the ONLY telecom CEO I know about who stood up on two legs and said, "Where's your warrant?"]

The Dingell-Markey-Stupak letter concludes,

The Administration's great discomfort with public scrutiny, however, leads us to believe that Congressional oversight is all the more necessary in this case. For that reason, we urge you to join with us in rejecting retroactive immunity until every Member that seeks information to inform his or her vote on this issue has received enough information to make a sound public policy decision.

Woo hoo, strong stuff. Good reading, even as a .pdf.

Thanks to Liz Rose at ACLU for the pointers.

Technorati Tags: AT&T, Bushco, Censorship, Constitution, FourthAmendment, Wiretap