Tuesday, March 07, 2006


WASHINGTON — The House renewed the USA Patriot Act in a cliffhanger vote Tuesday night, extending a centerpiece of the war on terrorism at President Bush's urging after months of political combat over the balance between privacy rights and the pursuit of potential terrorists.

Bush, forced by filibuster to accept new curbs on law enforcement investigations, is expected to sign the legislation before 16 provisions of the 2001 law expire on Friday.

The vote was 280-138, just two more than needed under special rules that required a two-thirds majority. The close vote caught senior Republican aides in both chambers by surprise. Sen. John Sununu, R-N.H., the sponsor of the new civil liberties protections, worked the House floor as representatives cast their votes.

Nonetheless, the vote marked a political victory for Bush and will allow congressional Republicans facing midterm elections this year to continue touting a tough-on-terror stance. Bush's approval ratings have suffered in recent months after revelations that he had authorized secret, warrantless wiretapping of Americans.

That issue helped fuel a two-month Senate filibuster that forced the White House to accept some new restrictions on information gathered in terrorism probes.

Republicans on Tuesday declared the legislative war won, saying the renewal of the act's 16 provisions along with new curbs on government investigatory power will help law enforcement prevent terrorists from striking.




"Intense congressional and public scrutiny has not produced a single substantiated claim that the Patriot Act has been misused to violate Americans' civil liberties," said House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis. "Opponents of the legislation have relied upon exaggeration and hyperbole to distort a demonstrated record of accomplishment and success."

"The president looks forward to signing the bill into law," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.

But the debate over the balance between a strong war against terrorists and civil liberties protections is far from over.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is holding hearings on the domestic wiretapping program. Additionally, Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the chief author of the Patriot Act renewal, has introduced a new measure "to provide extra protections that better comport with my sensitivity of civil rights."

Despite its passage the Patriot Act still has staunch congressional opponents who protested it by voting 'no' even on the part of the bill that would add new civil rights protections. During the Senate's final debate last week, Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., said he was voting 'no' because the new protections for Americans were so modest they were almost meaningless.

Such objections echoed during the House debate Tuesday, where the measure was supported by 214 Republicans and 66 Democrats and opposed by 13 Republicans, 124 Democrats and one Independent.

"I rise in strong opposition to this legislation because it offers only a superficial reform that will have little if any impact on safeguarding our civil liberties," said Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio.

For now, Bush will be signing a package on which members of both chambers of Congress and the president can agree.

The package renews 16 expiring provisions of the original Patriot Act, including one that allows federal officials to obtain "tangible items" like business records, including those from libraries and bookstores, for foreign intelligence and international terrorism investigations.

Other provisions would clarify that foreign intelligence or counterintelligence officers should share information obtained as part of a criminal investigation with counterparts in domestic law enforcement agencies.

Forced by Feingold's filibuster, Congress and the White House have agreed to new curbs on the Patriot Act's powers.


These restrictions would:

— Give recipients of court-approved subpoenas for information in terrorist investigations the right to challenge a requirement that they refrain from telling anyone.

— Eliminate a requirement that an individual provide the FBI with the name of a lawyer consulted about a National Security Letter, which is a demand for records issued by investigators.

— Clarify that most libraries are not subject to demands in those letters for information about suspected terrorists.

The legislation also takes aim at the distribution and use of methamphetamine by limiting the supply of a key ingredient found in everyday cold and allergy medicines.

Yet another provision is designed to strengthen port security by imposing strict punishments on crew members who impede or mislead law enforcement.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,187116,00.html

You just have to wonder why things end up the way they do.

Spying Inquiry Blocked by GOP

The Senate intelligence chair buys time, saying the White House is open to legislation on Bush's surveillance program. Many are doubtful.
By Greg Miller and Maura Reynolds, Times Staff Writers

February 17, 2006


WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans blocked a proposed investigation of President Bush's domestic spying operation Thursday as the chairman of the Intelligence Committee said he had reached an agreement with the White House to pursue legislation establishing clearer rules for the controversial program.

But Senate aides described the discussions with the White House as very preliminary. And angry Democrats expressed skepticism over the negotiations, with some describing them as a ploy to protect the Bush administration and the highly classified surveillance operation from congressional scrutiny.

ADVERTISEMENT
The political maneuvering underscored the stakes surrounding a secret intelligence-gathering program that the White House describes as crucial to preventing future terrorist attacks in the United States, but which critics see as unconstitutional and an abuse of executive power.

The tactics by Republicans on the Intelligence Committee leave the surveillance operations in place while giving the White House time to influence the debate on Capitol Hill. Separately, the House Intelligence Committee is considering its own inquiry. Among members of the panel raising questions about the program is Rep. Heather A. Wilson (R-N.M.).

Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), after a closed-door meeting with Senate committee members, said the panel had decided to adjourn without considering a Democratic proposal to begin an investigation of the program, which is run by the National Security Agency, an intelligence agency that operates eavesdropping posts around the globe.

Roberts, the panel chairman, said the vote was put off because the White House had "committed to legislation and has agreed to brief more Intelligence Committee members on the nature of the surveillance program."

White House officials confirmed a new willingness to consider legislative fixes, after weeks of insisting that no congressional action was necessary.

"We maintain that the president does not need additional congressional authority," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said. But she said the administration was now willing to discuss a GOP proposal that contained "some good legislative concepts that would not undermine the president's ability to protect Americans."

Perino was referring to a proposal by Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) that would specifically authorize the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on international calls involving U.S. residents and suspected terrorists overseas without first obtaining a court warrant.

The White House has said Bush has the authority to approve such operations to protect the nation. But critics say the program violates a 1978 statute — the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA — that outlawed domestic eavesdropping without approval from a special intelligence court.

The administration's new willingness to consider legislation appeared to be enough to appease several Republican lawmakers who had expressed misgivings about the domestic intelligence collection and were in a position to cast deciding votes on whether to launch a Senate inquiry.

A senior Republican aide said that before the meeting, Sens. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) and Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) told Roberts that they were prepared to vote for an investigation if the committee did not agree to work toward legislation.

The "agreement in principle" to discuss the DeWine proposal was enough to persuade the senators to postpone the vote on an inquiry. But the issue was far from resolved.

"This is just a starting point," the aide said.

Snowe indicated Thursday that the White House had bought a limited amount of time. In a statement, she called for "congressional and judicial review over a program that currently has none," and said the administration had until March 7 — when a follow-up Intelligence Committee meeting is scheduled — to "demonstrate its commitment to avoiding a constitutional deadlock."

The spying program was authorized by Bush in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks. Before the operation was exposed late last year, it had been one of the most closely guarded secrets in the intelligence community, with the administration providing briefings to only a handful of senior lawmakers.

Senate Democrats denounced Republicans for delaying the vote on an investigation. Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, the ranking Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said the party-line vote to adjourn the meeting before taking up the proposal was "another stalling tactic."

"Today, the Senate Intelligence Committee once again abdicated its responsibility to oversee the intelligence activities of the United States," Rockefeller said.

Roberts defended the decision to block the vote, saying he believed an investigation would hurt an intelligence operation that he described as "vital for the protection of the American people." He offered few specifics about his discussions with the White House on possible legislation. Roberts' spokeswoman, Sarah Ross Little, described those talks as in their early stages.

"There's nothing specific," Little said. "The White House has agreed and committed to work with Congress on an expanded role in oversight and some sort of legislative solution. But there is nothing particular or specific beyond that."

Other Republican aides said no legislative language had been shared with the White House. But White House and congressional officials said the discussions were focusing on DeWine's proposal, which also would create a new subcommittee on the Senate Intelligence Committee solely to monitor the National Security Agency program.

Critics have called the DeWine approach inadequate.

"To simply exclude communications from the coverage of FISA and allow secret wiretapping without a warrant … would be a clear violation of the 4th Amendment," Kate Martin, director of national security studies at George Washington University, said in an e-mail message.

Meanwhile on Thursday, the Justice Department was ordered by a federal judge to respond within 20 days to requests by a civil liberties group for documents about the National Security Agency program.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center had sued the department under the Freedom of Information Act seeking the release of the documents.

In a setback for Bush, U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy ordered the department to finish processing the group's requests and produce or identify all records within 20 days. A Justice Department spokesman said the agency was reviewing the ruling.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...home-headlines

This is a huge loss for personal privacy and rights for citizens in America. A very sad day.... lookin' more and more like 1984.

Atleast everyone is not taking this lying down. Yesterday, Senator Russ Feingold introduced a resolution to censure President Bush for breaking the law by illegally wiretapping American citizens.

Censuring a sitting president is serious business. But when the president misleads the public and Congress while willfully and repeatedly breaking the law, there must be consequences—that's how the law works for everybody else.
While most politicians sat back and weighed the political pros and cons of holding the president accountable, Senator Feingold stuck his neck out and did it. Now it's up to us to show broad public support. Can you sign our petition asking Congress to join the call for censure?

Right now it's unclear how many of Senator Feingold's colleagues will stand with him in this important fight. If we can reach 250,000 signatures, we'll deliver your comments to your senators this week to demonstrate widespread public support censuring the president for breaking the law. We'll also send a copy of the complete petition to Senator Feingold to show our support for his courage.

President Bush already had the authority to wiretap suspected terrorists—he could even wiretap first and get warrants 3 days later. But he chose to get no warrants at all, clearly violating the law set up to protect innocent Americans and then he misled the Congress and the public about his program.

Censuring the president means Congress officially acknowledges that the president broke the law and condemns him for doing it. Given the scale of the president's problem, it's a very reasonable first step to holding him accountable. This is a key moment for Congress to show that they're serious about checks and balances.

Our country was founded on the idea that everyone—even the president— has to follow the law. Supporting censure is the best opportunity we've got to keep that ideal alive. Can you sign our petition today?


http://political.moveon.org/censure/index.html