home

Support the FISA Filibuster

Senator Chris Dodd is going forward with plans for a filibuster Monday when the bad FISA revision bill comes up for debate.

Bottom line: The Senate must reject the Senate Intelligence Committee bill's with provisions for telecom immunity. It must insist that any bill passed carries protections for Americans against wiretapping that comport with the Fourth Amendment.

The ACLU says:

This week the Senate will consider making vast changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and will determine whether telecommunications companies should be held liable for their role in President Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program.

...."When the FISA Amendments Act of 2007 comes to the Senate floor this week, Congress has a duty and an opportunity to protect the Fourth Amendment and rein in the executive's spying power.

More...

....Congress also has the power to stand up and declare that 'because the president said so' is not a legal defense and to block sweeping immunity for the telecom companies. Senators must vote no on the Senate Intelligence Committee's bill, which so disturbingly mirrors the disastrous Protect America Act, to ensure that the president understands that Congress is not a mail order catalog but a co-equal branch of government.

There are 40 lawsuits pending against the telecom companies. The plaintiffs in those cases deserve their day in court. Telephone or E-mail your Senator now and tell him or her to vote no on any bill with immunity for telecoms.

The ACLU's FISA page is here .

Here's more on the two bills under consdieration.

< Countdown to Iowa: 17 Days | Giuliani's Predecessor as U.S. Attorney Says He's Mistaken About His Record >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    I think you mean (none / 0) (#1)
    by kovie on Mon Dec 17, 2007 at 01:02:36 AM EST
    the SENATE Intelligence Committee bill, which includes telcom immunity, not the "House Intelligence Committee" bill, which whatever form it originally took was passed out of the house w/o immunity.

    In any case yes, this must be blocked, if not in the senate, then in conference.

    correct (none / 0) (#2)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Dec 17, 2007 at 01:43:52 AM EST
    it was a typo.

    If I understand Reid correctly, the Intel bill had three Titles, one of which was immunity. Reid initially was going to have the Senate consider only two of the titles, not the one with immunity, along with the Senate Judiciary bill. Then he decided that wouldn't be fair, so now the Intel Committee bill, with the immunity provision included, is the base bill up for consideration.  

    Is this not the case?

    Parent

    I believe so (none / 0) (#3)
    by kovie on Mon Dec 17, 2007 at 03:15:11 AM EST
    Not sure what you mean by "three" titles, unless you mean the one and only version of the SSCI bill, which always had immunity, and the two parts of the SJC bill, one of which did not address immunity, and the other which did, and included it, but was not voted out of committee. If so, only the first two will be voted on, with the first the main bill and the other the alternate or amendment to it.

    To further complicate things, Monday's initial debate will not be about these bills, but about a motion to proceed with debate on them. If cloture is called and succeeds, there will then be debate on the actual bills, which can also be filibustered (I believe, I may be wrong), and then a vote on the actual bills if cloture succeeds. There may even be another step or two here than I'm missing.

    Some diaries and comments I've read seem to believe that Dodd has a good chance of blocking the SSCI bill, and others seem to believe that he doesn't (or isn't serious about it), and that this might be yet another show to fool the base. Either way, I hope that this helps further reve