New York Times--Senate Approves Bill to Broaden Wiretap Powers
A lawyer representing plaintiffs in a wiretap lawsuit against Verizon got it right when he said, "It’s presidential election-year cowardice. The Democrats are afraid of looking weak on national security." He was referring to the law passed yesterday by Congress that gives legal immunity to phone companies that cooperated in the NSA wiretapping program and broadens the governments power to seek emergency wiretaps on Americans without a court order from 3 days to 7. The law passed the Senate 69-28.
Hillary Clinton (NY) got it right. She voted nay. Jon Tester (MT) got it right. He voted nay. Russ Feingold (WI) got it right. He voted nay. Max Baucus (MT) was wrong, and sadly, so was Barack Obama (IL).
As I understood the process, in order to broker a deal to get a bill passed that is not supported by the majority party, usually the proponents of the bill make concessions by adding or removing text from that bill or trading support for another bill down the line. What did the American people get out of this deal? What did the Democrats get out of it? Nancy Pelosi (CA) pointed to a hard won "concession" that this bill reaffirms that FISA is the exclusive means of conducting intelligence wiretaps and this prevents Bush or any future president from evading court scrutiny. Wait a minute... didn't certain Democrats say the wiretaps were unlawful to begin with. How is a "reaffirmation" of the court's powers a concession? It sounds to me like the Democrats just folded (minus the respected individuals mentioned above).
One more point for the Bush. Democrats whiffed on this one. It made them look weak. I hope they are not taking the fall elections for granted.
No comments:
Post a Comment