FISA ....Telecom Group Key Player in Immunity Battle

[slipslidingaway]

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/013108J.shtml

By Matt Renner
t r u t h o u t | Investigative Report

Thursday 31 January 2008

"A think tank with close ties to the telecommunication industry has been working with a key Democrat in the Senate on a domestic surveillance bill that would provide telecommunications companies with retroactive immunity for possibly violating federal law by spying on American citizens at the behest of the Bush administration...


During the crafting of the Intelligence Committee bill, Bennett met with a frequent contact of his, Clete Johnson, Rockefeller's legislative aide for military and national security issues, to discuss the FISA legislation. At the meeting, Bennett advised Johnson on talking points to help make the case for telecom immunity...

Twelve Democrats broke with their party and joined Republicans by voting against the Senate Judiciary version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act legislation on Thursday, January 24. The bill would have stripped out the retroactive immunity for telecoms...

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00002

Out of a total of six "Honorary Senate Chairs" of Third Way, only Sen. Blanch Lincoln (D-Arkansas) voted with the majority of Democrats on the Judiciary bill..."

http://www.thirdway.org/leadership/senate_chairs

[slipslidingaway]

1. ACLU Fact Sheet: Amendments to Senate FISA Bill

Regarding Immunity for Telecommunications Companies that Facilitated Warrantless Wiretapping (2/4/2008)

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/33906leg20080204.html


"The Senate is poised to consider three amendments regarding immunity for telecommunications companies that facilitated warrantless wiretapping. The amendments will modify the bill produced by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, as modified by the managers’ amendment. That bill currently would dismiss lawsuits pending against the telecommunications companies that undertook wiretapping in violation of the clear terms of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (“FISA”).


In contrast, the House-passed RESTORE Act does not grant immunity for these companies, thus allowing the pending lawsuits consolidated in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to continue until their final disposition. The ACLU believes that all plaintiffs suing regarding violations of FISA should be given their day in court and that Congress should not interfere with those plaintiffs’ statutory and constitutional rights to sue to protect Americans’ privacy in their phone calls and e-mails. The ACLU urges Senators to continue to allow the court to hear and decide these matters in the manner established by FISA, which ensures victims of warrantless wiretapping the right to sue. Thus, the House RESTORE Act is vastly superior to the pending Senate bill in that the House bill does not dismiss those lawsuits.

The three amendments and the ACLU’s vote recommendations are discussed below:

Dodd -Feingold-Leahy – Amendment #3907
Vote Recommendation: Yes

...

Specter-Whitehouse – Amendment # 3927
Vote Recommendation: If Dodd -Feingold-Leahy Amendment #3907 is tabled or fails, Yes, otherwise No

...

Feinstein – Amendment # 3919
Vote Recommendation: If Dodd -Feingold-Leahy Amendment #3907 is tabled or fails, Yes, otherwise No

..."

[dysfunctional press]

4. i still haven't had anyone explain to me why retroactive immunity isn't uncostitutional-

isn't it in actuality a "law of ex-post facto"(after the fact)? and isn't it specifically spelled out in the constitution that congress shall pass no laws of ex-post facto?

[slipslidingaway]

6. Maybe someone else will weigh in on the issue. If I remember

correctly this was also brought up during the MCA in late 2006 when it had the immunity provision.

:shrug:

[slipslidingaway]

2. ACLU Letter to the Senate...this lists more of the amendments

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/33909leg20080204.html

"...The FISA Amendments Act of 2007 has severe constitutional failings. Although we recommend that the above amendments pass to increase protections for American communications, the final product would still, as a whole, insufficiently protect Americans’ Fourth Amendment right to be free from government intrusion.

For these reasons, the ACLU ultimately recommends a no vote on final passage of any bill that extends the government’s warrantless wiretapping authority or grants retroactive immunity to companies who participated in warrantless surveillance of Americans. If the Protect America Act sunsets, all current programmatic orders could operate for an additional year, and new surveillance would simply revert to the FISA that has been updated dozens of times and served our intelligence community for thirty years. A sunset of these unprecedented and expansive authorities is far preferable to advancing a bill that encroaches on Americans’ privacy."

[gulfcoastliberal]

3. K&R - Rockefeller openly took telco $$ for immunity.

Source:

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/10/dem-pushing-spy.html

[slipslidingaway]

5. Thanks for the picture, also this update at your link...

"...Rockefeller is believed to have a personal fortune over $100 million. He spent $12 million of personal funds on his first Senate campaign. (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-3521561.html)

However "in recent campaigns, he has downplayed his personal wealth in one of the nation's poorest states. 'I will not spend one single dime of any money that I have,' he said in 2002. 'So that I if I don't raise money, I won't spend money. I am on exactly the same playing field, so to speak, with anybody else who runs for office.'" AP

He's up for election in 2008. The cost of Senate races has increased several times over the last two decades. With a serious Republican challenger in WV, which Bush won twice, such as Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, he could be forced to raise tens of millions of dollars. That, or break his promise not to use his personal fortune, which wouldn't play very well in one of the country's poorest states.

So yes, even a Rockefeller has to raise money. And in West Virginia, $50,000 is a lot of money. It's about 2% of all the money he raised last year. (But I'll bet he's slightly more worried about being red-baited for suppurtin' terrists.)"

[slipslidingaway]

7. Comments on the FISA bill from the Congressional Record...

this page also includes statements made on the economic stimulus package.

http://congrecord.liberatedtext.org/2008/fisa/index.html