Political Establishment Expands White House Wiretapping Powers, Retroactively Codifies Warrantless Wiretaps

It's time to acknowledge that there is little difference between the two parties on issues of executive power and civil liberties -- in the minds of the political establishment, rhetoric about the "war on terror" trumps all. Also: time to kick a whole lot of Congress out -- and it would be lovely if a pink slip meant something other than the revolving door.

Approximately half of the Democrats (69 to 28 vote) in the Senate rolled over and gave the White House a re-write of the Foreign Intelligence surveillance Act, a re-write dubbed by the media and politicos as a "re-authorization," even though the 1978-passed bill was not up for a sunset.

That entrenched political establishment includes presumed Democratic Presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama (IL), who reversed an early promise to vote against any FISA bill that contained retroactive immunity for telecoms that acquiesced to White House warrantless wiretap requests. What will his NetRoots do now?

Surprising to me: Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) voted against the measure. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), the presumed Republican presidential nominee, was campaigning but supported the measure.

This new legislation eviscerates legislation written in 1978 specifically in response to Executive Branch abuses by the Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon Administrations -- abuses that seem to pale before those perpetrated by the Bush Administration.

Immunity Provision Not Needed
What the mainstream media -- and Beltway politicians -- have failed to tell you is that there would be no need for immunity if the White House had followed the law. Thus, this immunity provision is as much for the residents of the White House as it is for officials at Verizon and AT&T.

Qwest shareholders will now probably file a lawsuit against management for refusing to go along, since that act resulted in Qwest's allegedly being cut off from federal contracts.

The List To Thank
Here's a list of the Democratic Senators who refused to go along with the White House bill. I feel uniquely honored that BOTH of my Senators voted "no."

• Akaka (D-HI)
• Biden (D-DE)
• Bingaman (D-NM)
• Boxer (D-CA)
• Brown (D-OH)
• Byrd (D-WV)
• Cantwell (D-WA)
• Cardin (D-MD)
• Clinton (D-NY)
• Dodd (D-CT)
• Dorgan (D-ND)
• Durbin (D-IL)
• Feingold (D-WI)
• Harkin (D-IA)
• Kerry (D-MA)
• Klobuchar (D-MN)
• Lautenberg (D-NJ)
• Leahy (D-VT)
• Levin (D-MI)
• Menendez (D-NJ)
• Murray (D-WA)
• Reed (D-RI)
• Reid (D-NV)
• Sanders (I-VT)
• Schumer (D-NY)
• Stabenow (D-MI)
• Tester (D-MT)
• Wyden (D-OR)

These Senators were representing the viewpoint of a majority of Americans surveyed in January: 63% believed that the government should be required to get a warrant before tapping conversations of US citizens.

From my June post, here's what your Representatives and Senators just gave the White House:

• The 1978 FISA allowed the National Security Agency to conduct a wiretap for 72 hours before getting FISA Court approval. The re-write extends this grace period to a week, 168 hours; gives the government the ok to continue wiretaps during appeals; and allows the government to keep all data even if the FISA Court rejects the wiretap! (From Kevin Drum)
  
  
• The new act provides wholesale approval of bulk monitoring of electronic communications such as email and phone calls; "the NSA appears to be doing ... very large scale data mining on virtually every phone call and email between the United States and overseas, looking for patterns that fit a profile of some kind." These are not targeted foreign-to-foreign communications and thus can ensnare citizens without cause; the targets are picked by software algorithms, not using legal concepts like probable cause. "For all practical purposes, then, the decision about which U.S. citizens to spy on is being vested in a small group of technicians operating in secret and creating criteria that virtually no one else understands." (From Kevin Drum)
  
  
• There is limited judicial review of data collection programs. "The role of judges is limited to ascertaining whether the Attorney General has completed a certification promising that either he has followed the law, or that he will follow the law soon. If the Attorney General cannot meet even this spectacularly low bar, the bill gives the government time to amend and to re-file the certificate... This is a radical break from the FISA regime created in 1978." (From The Nation)
  
  
• "From 2001 to 2007, the NSA engaged in a secret program that was a straightforward violation of America's wiretapping laws... the new law moves the goal posts, taking illegal things the administration was doing and making them legal." (From Slate)
  
  
• "The FISA reauthorization bill is an outrage because it, much like the original FISA, does not hold the executive branch enforceably accountable for its own abuses of power." (From Civil Liberty @ About.com)

Around About:

• Second Thoughts about Suitor Obama, Deborah White
• Presidential Candidates and The Topic of Terrorism, Amy Zalman
• Civil Liberties Timeline, Tom Head