A Graceful Cave On FISA?
For months, Democrats in the House and Senate have have huffed and puffed at the start of the debate on various bills, then left whimpering when President Bush got his way again. That’s certainly been true with the Iraq funding bills. Based on this Washington Times article, it sounds like they’re getting better at caving into President Bush’s demands:
But the House Democratic leadership is under mounting pressure from members of the Blue Dog Coalition (a group of relatively moderate Democrats who joined with Republicans in August to pass a temporary extension of FISA over Mrs. Pelosi’s objections) to adopt the Senate bill or work out some kind of compromise on retroactive liability protection. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer indicated last week that he wants to work out an agreement, and Mr. Reyes, interviewed on CNN’s “Late Edition,” said that the Intelligence Committee had been talking to telecommunications companies “because if we’re going to give them blanket immunity, we want to know and understand what it is we’re giving them immunity for.” The Texas Democrat’s use of the term “blanket immunity” would appear to suggest that the House leadership is moving toward the Senate bill. Mr. Reyes added that he has an “open mind” about retroactive liability protection, and said negotiators are “very close” to working out some kind of compromise.
This had to happen if we were serious about preventing future terrorist attacks. Now that it’s all but signed, sealed and delivered to President Bush’s desk, the NSA can breath a sigh of relief.
Meanwhile, Nancy Boyda says that the FISA reform bill will shred the Constitution:
“I am adamant about protecting the Constitution. They’re giving nothing in
return for it. We’re not getting any more security and they’re shredding the Constitution,” said U.S. Rep. Nancy Boyda, D-Second Dist.
Ms. Boyda should’ve paid attention to what Mike McConnell said when he talked about how a FISA appeals court ruling changed the entire landscape for intel-gathering agencies:
The reason that the FISA law was passed in 1978 was an arrangement was worked out between the Congress and the administration, we did not want to allow this community to conduct surveillance, electronic surveillance, of Americans for foreign intelligence unless you had a warrant, so that was required. So there was no warrant required for a foreign target in a foreign land. And so we are trying to get back to what was the intention of ‘78.
Court after court has ruled that intelligence-gathering in wartime is a reasonable search. It should also be noted that warrants weren’t required for foreign intelligence gathering prior to FISA’s enactment in 1978. Here’s more of Rep. Boyda’s infantile rant:
“What shocks me is how members of Congress from Kansas would so readily give up 230 years of our Constitution without gaining any additional security,” Boyda said.
Rep. Boyda would be wise to study the precedents on this issue. It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that she didn’t know about previous FISA rulings in the appellate courts. As I stated earlier, FISA didn’t exist until 1978. Prior to that, warrants weren’t needed to surveil foreign communications because courts had ruled that gathering intelligence in wartime was a reasonable search. (Hint to Rep. Boyda: The Fourth Amendment only covers unreasonable searches.)
It’s sad that Rep. Boyda doesn’t think that the NSA’s regaining the powers that they once had is “gaining any additional security.” Clearly, DNI chief Mike McConnell thinks that it restored their capabilities. Here’s another piece of information that Rep. Boyda should process:
A knowledgeable source on intelligence issues, who declined to speak on the record concerning a sensitive topic, said that current FISA legislation worked, but was not expeditious. Targets of opportunity were difficult to pursue under current FISA guidelines.
Time matters. That’s why this legislation is important. For a legislator to deny that it isn’t exposes that legislator as either an idiot or a spinmeister. Whichever the case, we can’t tolerate people as unserious as Rep. Boyda voting on such important matters, especially in wartime.
She needs to be retired this November.
Technorati Tags: FISA, Nancy Pelosi, Nacny Boyda, Steny Hoyer, Sylvestre Reyes, Intelligence, Immunity, Telecommunications, NSA, President Bush
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog
March 4th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
People like Boyda will continue to spin this in the form they have because it plays to their strength(s). However, those that continue their form of “fear mongering” ignore research that proves we the people understand National Security and protecting companies that help to track down terrorists.
It’s just more fun to use the “UFO Rant” position than to speak the truth. The Liberal Democrats would have nothing to speak of or motivate their base - I guess they could make another doomsday movie?
There’s data out there, they just need to read the reports.