FISA Action in the Senate NOW = Votes Down 2nd Surveillance Amendment

[L. Coyote]

Senate Votes Down 2nd Surveillance Amendment
By Paul Kiel - February 7, 2008, 5:56PM - http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/senate_votes_down_2nd_surveill.php


The Senate finally got around to yet another of the amendments to the surveillance bill. This one was sponsored by Sens. Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Chris Dodd (D-CT) and the ACLU provides this description:

A critical flaw of is that there is simply no prior court review of any kind of the government’s expanded surveillance. This is only exacerbated by the fact that the little court review there is – which is limited to review of guidelines after surveillance has begun – appears to not be accompanied by the explicit authority to modify surveillance procedures already under way. This amendment allows the FISA court to amend surveillance programs if it finds them to be contrary to the requirements of this bill or the Fourth Amendment, and to limit the use of illegally collected information.

The amendment was defeated 39-56, with Sens. Jay Rockefeller (D-WI), Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Tim Johnson (D-ND), Even Bayh (D-IN), Tom Carper (D-DE), and Mary Landruei (D-LA) joined the nays.

There will be at least one more vote this evening and in just a few minutes. This one is another amendment by Russ Feingold, one that would prevent "reverse targeting" ...

.............

[VP505]

1. They are going through the

motions but bottom line is Reid and Rockefeller will make sure Bu$h gets everything he wants, not with their capitulation but with their deliberate effort. About as disgusting as it gets, IMO...

[L. Coyote]

2. Update: That second bill went down 38-57, also with a large number of Dems crossing over ...

Feinstein, Inouye, Johnson, Landrieu, Lincoln, Pryor, Rockefeller, Salazar among them.

[slipslidingaway]

3. K&R Links to votes and summaries of the amendments...

although there really does not seem to be much interest in this issue.

:shrug:


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

"S.A. 3913 Feingold-Menendez-Dodd Significant Purpose Test. This amendment would require the government to return to court and obtain an individualized court order when, in the course of tapping a target abroad, a significant purpose of the tap is to acquire the communications of a person in the U.S. It makes important strides towards preventing the government from using the foreign end of the communication as a pretext for listening to Americans."

http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00012


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

"S.A. 3915 Feingold-Dodd Court Authority to Amend Warrantless Surveillance Programs and Limit Use of Illegally Collected Information. A critical flaw of S.2248 is that there is simply no prior court review of any kind of the government’s expanded surveillance. This is only exacerbated by the fact that the little court review there is – which is limited to review of guidelines after surveillance has begun – appears to not be accompanied by the explicit authority to modify surveillance procedures already under way. This amendment allows the FISA court to amend surveillance programs if it finds them to be contrary to the requirements of this bill or the Fourth Amendment, and to limit the use of illegally collected information."

http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00011


http://www.aclu.org/safefree/spying/34002leg20080206.html

“The Senate should not fool itself; by supporting final passage of the intelligence committee’s domestic spying bill, Congress would be granting the administration virtually unchecked powers to monitor the calls and emails of ordinary Americans on American soil without a warrant for the next six years...

“Richard A. Clarke, former head of counterterrorism at the National Security Council said it best when he wrote in Sunday’s Philadelphia Inquirer, `Let me be clear: Our ability to track and monitor terrorists overseas would not cease should the Protect America Act expire. If this were true, the president would not threaten to terminate any temporary extension with his veto pen….For this president, fear is an easier political tactic than compromise. With FISA, he is attempting to rattle Congress into hastily expanding his own executive powers at the expense of civil liberties and constitutional protections.’”

[crickets]

4. Constitution? What Constitution?

Sigh. K&R

[DebJ]

5. Landruei needs to join Lieberman. Is she up for election this year?

I'd like to contribute to any competition.

[Leopolds Ghost]

7. Landrieu is the one who sold New Orleans down the river

Saying she wanted to tie hurricane relief to getting more of a share of
offshore oil royalties, and when she was criticized for foot dragging,
she said "Katrina has changed the makeup of my constituents and I must
cater to a new group of constituents" implying that the permanent
displacement of New Orleans black voters was legitimate permanent and
irreversable and perhaps (if you believe the Washington Post or the
Houston Chronicle) desirable.

[Leopolds Ghost]

6. If the Dems legalized Bush's crimes and the mods failed to pin a thread about it to the wall of GD

Would it make a sound?

Perhaps out of loyalty to the pro-wiretapping senators
Reid, Mikulski, Rockefeller (who I kept telling people
supported legalizing warrantless wiretapping back when
the sheeple on DU wanted to impeach Bush for it, and
they said "don't impugn Rockefeller, I am sure he will
do the right thing!) the owners of this site and the
PAID campaign operatives who currently infest GD : P
will do nothing.

Now, instead of 300-post threads on IMPEACHING Bush for
Warrantless Wiretapping,

we have FIVE-POST threads on DEMS LEGALIZING NOT JUST
BUSH'S CRIMES, but setting the stage for future crimes
of the same sort by a DEMOCRATIC president.

Who cares who wins the next election if this is true?

[slipslidingaway]

8. You missed this thread...

the time to be aggressive and take action is before the votes, not much sense in whining about it later. Clinton and Obama should be on the floor trying to sway others to vote for these amendments IMO.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2826324

You're right...who cares.

:shrug: