Good For The House Democrats

by hilzoy

From the NYT:

"In continued defiance of the White House, House Democratic leaders are readying a proposal that would reject giving legal protection to the phone companies that helped in the National Security Agency’s program of wiretapping without warrants after the Sept. 11 attacks, Congressional officials said Monday.

Instead of blanket immunity, the tentative proposal would give the federal courts special authorization to hear classified evidence and decide whether the phone companies should be held liable. House Democrats have been working out the details of their proposal in the last few days, officials said, and expect to take it to the House floor for a vote on Thursday. (...)

The tentative proposal worked out by House Democratic leaders, officials said, has three main elements.

It would impose tougher restrictions on National Security Agency eavesdropping than the Senate version does by requiring court approval before the agency’s wiretapping procedures, instead of approval after the fact. It would also reject retroactive immunity for the phone carriers.

The proposal would also create a bipartisan Congressional commission with subpoena power to issue a report on the surveillance programs, including the one approved by Mr. Bush to monitor some Americans’ international communications without warrants.

The commission would seek to find out how the program was actually run. Some Democrats complain that even now, more than two years after the program was first publicly disclosed, many questions about its operations remain unanswered.

The idea of giving federal courts specific jurisdiction to determine the immunity issue is somewhat similar to a proposal made in the Senate by Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California. That was soundly defeated by a vote of 57 to 41.

House Democratic officials say they like elements of the idea because it would allow the courts to decide the issue and answer the concerns of the phone carriers, who say they have been muzzled in defending themselves by the government’s efforts to invoke the “state secrets” privilege on the lawsuits."

TPMMuckraker has more details here.

This sounds good to me (though since I haven't seen the actual draft, I can't say for sure.) I think we should try to meet the legitimate concerns of the telecoms, where "legitimate concerns" do not involve the concern, shared by all of us, that we might be prosecuted or sued if there is evidence that we have actually broken the law. My main concern is that the lawsuits presently filed be allowed to go forward, and that someone be accountable for what happened.

Comments

[Ugh]

Why do I get the feeling I'm running towards a female with black hair holding an oblong ball upright on the ground with one finger with respect to this bill?

[cleek]

it's nice to see things move past the strongly-worded-letter stage, but i wonder if the Dems know what they're doing on this level. every Mario player knows you rarely get through a new level on your first try.

[Ugh]

every Mario player knows you rarely get through a new level on your first try.

Not to mention Senate Dems supporting immunity, etc.

[KCinDC]

Yeah, I think we can rely on Reid, Rockefeller, Mikulski, and company to screw this up.

[Mr Furious]

Let's see what happens in conference...but this is a positive step.

[Ugh]

Oh fnck. Laura Rozen is reporting that Adm. Fallon has resigned.

[Ugh]

CNN too.

[CaseyL]

Oh, fnck, indeed. And then some...

Adm. Fallon was a big obstacle to Bush/Cheney starting a war with Iran. He said it would not happen on his watch.

Now it's not his watch anymore, and speculation is that means military action against Iran before the end of the year.

Because, I figure, there aren't too many independent types left in the top spots. Just Bush-Cheney hacks.

[Jay C]

Dunno if this is the right take on it, but ISTM that the longer the Democrats in the House can run the clock on the telecom immunity provisions, the better their chances are for killing them outright.

I think that, having cried "wolf!" way too often, President Bush has little left to fight with other than his usual petulant foot-stamping and ever-less-credible scaremongering. And the veto, of course. But every week that passes without the sky falling due to lack-of-retroactive-immunity is another week to disarm his hysterical rhetoric about the Dire Consequences of allowing suits against the Adminstration's (probably illegal) surveillance programs to proceed.

The Senate, of course, is disgracefully in the tank over this issue, but at least if the House keeps displaying this modicum of political courage, there is a moderate hope for the eventual triumph of the rule of law. Maybe.

[felix culpa]

At least they’re not caving; and it may be instructive to watch the White House dodging and weaving. The longer the dispute continues, the more apt information will emerge, and the more tightly Bush may find himself cornered. For the moment much seems possible that didn’t a short time ago.

[felix culpa]

Having now seen the bad news...Oh oh oh.
I imagine most of us have been abating breath for fear of terminal psychopathy and ideological apocalypticism baring its fangs before next January.
Kinda been hoping, myself, that the military would refuse to be a part of patent madness.
Ahhhhgh.

[Batocchio]

Hmm. I wasn't crazy about Feinstein's amendment because the assessments were still being made behind closed doors. I suppose it's preferable to blanket amnesty, though. What I'd really like is a full investigation. I'd be happier if at least Congress knew Dick Cheney's spying habits.

[Frank]

You guys are giving this crap way too much credit.

There is no need whatsoever for a new FISA bill.

The fact that the house is trying to pass one is prima facie evidence of bad intent.

Tell them to cut it out.