Chairman Rockefeller outlines congressional proposal for interim FISA Fix

[The Straight Story]

CHAIRMAN ROCKEFELLER OUTLINES CONGRESSIONAL PROPOSAL FOR INTERIM FISA FIX

Washington, DC -- Senator Jay Rockefeller, Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said today that he is working closely with Senators Reid and Leahy and their House counterparts, along with top officials in the Bush Administration, to craft a temporary legislative fix to FISA.

Rockefeller and Democratic congressional leaders are proposing a 6-month interim fix before Congress adjourns for the August recess with the expectation that the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees will work together on long-term FISA modernization when Congress returns in September.

“Given the continued threat environment, and some recent technical developments, I have become convinced that we must take some immediate, but interim step to improve collection of foreign intelligence in a manner that doesn’t compromise civil liberties of U.S. citizens.

“The Administration has offered a proposal that would instead permanently grant the Attorney General excessive surveillance powers by giving him sole authority to direct surveillance while completely removing the FISA Court from the process. That is simply unacceptable.

“The FISA Court must continue to play an essential role in authorizing surveillance and overseeing its execution. They are the trusted steward of FISA, and they can and must be a part of any new streamlined approach. The proposal we put forward maintains the essential role of the FISA Court while also giving our intelligence officials additional tools to strengthen their hand against terrorists. We need the Administration to act quickly if we are going to pass this critical piece of legislation in the next few days,” Rockefeller said.

The interim fix proposed by Senator Rockefeller and others seeks to:

Ø Reinforce that foreign-to-foreign collection is not covered by FISA, consistent with current law;

Ø Ensure that the FISA Court, not solely the Attorney General, has an oversight role where foreign target surveillance touches on individuals inside the U.S.;

Ø Grant FISA Court new authority for court orders covering certain aggregated foreign collection while protecting rights and privacy of U.S. persons;

Ø Ensure continued FISA Court approval of guidelines and procedures for minimizing U.S. identities and determining the point at which initial foreign collection transitions to cover U.S. persons of interest (thereby triggering individual probable cause warrant requirements);

Ø Maintain FISA Court authority to compel compliance from telecommunications companies; and

Ø Set forth a firm legislative sunset date to ensure continued action on more lasting comprehensive FISA reforms.

Earlier this year, the Senate Intelligence Committee began work on the issue of modernizing FISA with the overarching goal of improving foreign intelligence collection, protecting civil liberties, and preventing this or any future President from ever abusing surveillance laws again.

Unfortunately, the Committee has been hampered in its ability to address FISA modernization because the Administration has refused to provide key documents at the heart of the warrantless surveillance program: the Presidential orders authorizing the program and the Department of Justice opinions on the legality of the program.

The interim fix proposed by Senator Rockefeller and others would allow for improved intelligence collection, along with sufficient oversight, until a long-term solution is achieved.

http://rockefeller.senate.gov/news/2007/pr080107.html

[Robbien]

1. Just plain cow patties.

They put out this garbage now, but later when Pelosi and Reid and the Blue Dogs are done with it, the final bill will give Cheney/Bush/Gonzo MORE power, not less.

[Junkdrawer]

2. The ACLU Letter to Matt Stoller is making me scratch my head....

Matt,

Much of your criticism is unwarranted: we worked FISA and hard (and have been since December 2005). We reached out to Democratic leaders -- we met with Pelosi and with Reid -- we spoke with the staff from every leadership office. They did not listen to us. It was dem leadership who scheduled the vote on these particular bills. Why be mad at us and not at them? We met with them. They rebuffed our arguments.

We weren't notified that the bill was moving until 6 days before when Rep. Harman let it slip on Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer. We gave it the full court press: with action alerts, meetings with Members of Congress and Senators and their staff.

Pelosi and friends spent the entire week negotiating with the DNI and cut out ALL the civil liberties groups - not just the ACLU. Senator Rockefeller led the effort on the Senate side (with McConnell). The bill only passed because a) 41 dems crossed the line in the house, after the "liberal leadership" could NOT muster up its own party to assert its 30 seat majority, and b) most importantly, Pelosi, our "liberal leader" scheduled the bill in the first place. She could have put any bill on the schedule and she chose the Administration's. We worked this hard, and somehow you blame the ACLU?

....

http://openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=611

That seems to suggest the Rockefeller lobbied for a bill he later voted against...

Could there be more to the direct heir of John D. than meets the eye? :shrug:

[ProSense]

3. Last-minute changes,

see this and this.

This bill should have never come up for a vote.

[Nite Owl]

4. Further down at your link:

"Blaming the media establishment is of course correct to a point, but fails to ask the right question: why are the Dems so helpless against media bias? Given recent failures the rational person has no choice but to wonder whether this is really helplessness at all, or simply their part in the eternal dance of the power elite. Whether Nader was 100 percent literally telling the truth about both parties.
So again, why are the Dems so scared? If they are not simply complicit, why are they so incompetent at communication compared to the semi-literate wingnuts? Saying they are victims of the media is too easy an excuse -- it's kind of like saying rapists are the victims of sexy women. Thing is, their paralyzing fear is not justified by results. Folks like Sanders, Feingold, the late Wellstone, and others have proven time and time again that unembarrassed progressives can do just fine in purple states. The difference between success an failure is not in toeing the Fox line but in communicating how your stances affect your constituents. Why are so many Dems unable to do that?"

Why? These aren't dumb or naive people we have in DC and that excuse just doesn't fly anymore. Why do they seemingly make the same mistake over and over, why is impeachment so off the table?

[Junkdrawer]

5. I've mused before on the Jay Rockefeller thing...

On the one hand, his "Liberal" credentials are all in order..Peace Corp...VISTA..voted against NAFTA...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Rockefeller

On the other hand, if I were the great grandson of John D. and wanted to rule the world from a powerful-but-inconspicuous spot, it would be hard to beat Chairman of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee...

I frankly just don't know what to make of the man....

[Nite Owl]

6. I don't either.

I know it's 'national security' and all that he is dealing with and we are supposed to just 'trust' when they make some decisions as they know things we don't but on the other hand give us something on which to place all the trust they want.