A modest FISA proposal

[Jakes Progress]

In the matter of the FISA bill there could be a compromise that will work. The bill as it stands should not be passed. However, all of the provisions can remain by adding one element to protect the viability of the Fourth Amendment. The government can request any surveillance with only the restrictions allowed in the current bill, but all requests will be subject to a judicial and legislative review board afterward. If the requests are found to be personal or political in nature and cannot be proved to be specifically for the national defense, then the nature of the requests will be made public and the officials involved will be guilty of criminal activity such as abuse of power and misuse of public funds. Penalties should include fines, imprisonment, and removal from office.

Many elements of this are already in the FISA plan in place, but specifically spelling them out and making these elements a part of public awareness would bypass the problems that arise from the current bill passed by the House and under consideration by the Senate such as letting the republicans use an attack for political gain.

This proposal would allow for necessary surveillance in a timely matter just as the administration has requested. Therefore, no future terrorist acts could be used by either side for political advantage. But this provision would make sure that the powers were not abused. If a sitting president, of either party, were to attempt to use these powers in disregard for the privacy guarantees of the Fourth Amendment, he or she would be subject to penalties and the public could be made aware of those crimes. I'm thinking of our sitting pres and his cronies deciding to wire tap Obama headquarters or GreenPeace.

I think that a compromise of this nature would avoid the political pitfalls involved in either passing or rejecting the current bill. No one could oppose the bill without political fall out. First it provides for the timely defense of our country. Who could argue against that? Secondly, it assures us that the Bill of Rights is protected and that those who misuse their power of office are made accountable for their actions. What congressman could defend voting against that?

The matter of retroactive immunity would still be held under these laws. If the requests for surveillance were valid and can be proven so, then there would be no illegality. I agree that the telecoms should be held accountable, but no more so than the government that called for the actions. If you make those actions legal now, as the current bill does, then going after the telecoms is just tit-for-tat retribution. The currently considered bill, even if some were able to magically strip away the retroactive provisions legislatively, would create a legal tangle that would be in the courts for a decade.

I’m sure that right-minded legal minds can make the details of this kind of compromise better. Secure the country, but put iron-clad protection around our Constitution by providing assurances against political power grabs that would rob us of the American way of life.

Just a suggestion. Comments? Does anyone think this could work?

[daa]

1. I'll tell you what will work

Hang up on AT&T, Verizon and any politician that supports destroying the 4th amendment.

[Jakes Progress]

2. Gave up the telecoms. But that doesn't protect

the fourth amendment though. And right now we don't have a candidate running who doesn't seem to support destroying the Bill of Rights. (Hey, we still got nine of ten.)

This proposal could be added to the current bill as an amendment in the Senate. Once passed it would have to go back to the House. It could solve both our constitutional and political problems with the bill.