Posted on 08/04/2007 8:35:10 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - The House handed President Bush a victory Saturday, voting to expand the government's abilities to eavesdrop without warrants on foreign suspects whose communications pass through the United States.
The 227-183 vote, which followed the Senate's approval Friday, sends the bill to Bush for his signature. He had urged Congress to approve it, saying Saturday, "Protecting America is our most solemn obligation."
The administration said the measure is needed to speed the National Security Agency's ability to intercept phone calls, e-mails and other communications involving foreign nationals "reasonably believed to be outside the United States." Civil liberties groups and many Democrats said it goes too far, possibly enabling the government to wiretap U.S. residents communicating with overseas parties without adequate oversight from courts or Congress.
The bill updates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA. It gives the government leeway to intercept, without warrants, communications between foreigners that are routed through equipment in United States, provided that "foreign intelligence information" is at stake. Bush describes the effort as an anti-terrorist program, but the bill is not limited to terror suspects and could have wider applications, some lawmakers said.
The government long has had substantial powers to intercept purely foreign communications that don't touch U.S. soil.
If a U.S. resident becomes the chief target of surveillance, the government would have to obtain a warrant from the special FISA court.
Congressional Democrats won a few concessions in negotiations earlier in the week. New wiretaps must be approved by the director of national intelligence and the attorney general, not just the attorney general. Congress has battled with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on several issues, and some Democrats have accused him of perjury.
The new law also will expire in six months unless Congress renews it. The administration wanted the changes to be permanent.
Many congressional Democrats wanted tighter restrictions on government surveillance, but yielded in the face of Bush's veto threats and the impending August recess.
"This bill would grant the attorney general the ability to wiretap anybody, any place, any time without court review, without any checks and balances," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., during the debate preceding the vote. "I think this unwarranted, unprecedented measure would simply eviscerate the 4th Amendment," which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.
Republicans disputed her description. "It does nothing to tear up the Constitution," said Rep. Dan Lungren, R-Calif.
If an American's communications are swept up in surveillance of a foreigner, he said, "we go through a process called minimization" and get rid of the records unless there is reason to suspect the American is a threat.
The administration began pressing for changes to the law after a recent ruling by the FISA court. That decision barred the government from eavesdropping without warrants on foreign suspects whose messages were being routed through U.S. communications carriers, including Internet sites.
Two Republicans - Johnson (IL), Jones (NC) - vote against the Bill. What’s with these Bozos?
The trade off was most likely the fact that they werem’t going home for their August vacation without sending a bill to the President that he could sign. He was clear on that. It took way too long but it seems the President has finally realized that his best option is to play hardball and he is good at it when he does it.
Ping to Norm’s Post #2
Walter B. Jones voted nay.
It must have killed the AP writer to type that.
Well the ones from red states certainly do at any rate.
You mean more so than usual right?
Reason #1..First and foremost, They are true, hard core Trial Lawyers.
“Wow. The Democrats did the right thing. Maybe they actually do have an instinct for self-preservation.”
What this demonstrates is that the dem opposition to the plan was not principled. They were only against it b/c it was President Bush’s plan. They would run the risk of failing to detect another (perhaps major) terrorist attack on Americans in order to score political points against our President.
Suddenly they agree to pass it b/c their (rediculous) 4-6 week break could be delayed. If these people had an ounce of principal beyond their own self interest they would have stayed and fought it out.
My guess..if you surveyed Rats,,you would find that they still believe the congress opposed this bill and was blocking the Pres.
The press will downplay this and still continue to talk like Bush and Cheney are out to violate everyone’s civil rights.
They probably have been shopping at RINO’s R Us.
I think you'll find that the vast majority of Democrats voted against the bill
I’m glad you pointed this out. I was really watching Hunter and this p*sses me off. I’m not sure if this is apathy or just bad decision making, but he’s going nowhere and he’s putting forth NO effort to be a good candidate. It even more upsets me about Tancredo. It’s not immigration - I guess Tancredo really is a one trick pony.
I noted that too. WTH...
ping
Isn’t it amazing what can get done when you threaten to cancel the kiddie’s summer vacation?
It looks like the only thing the President asked for that he didn’t get was to make this permanent. In 6 months when this comes up again, maybe he can threaten the DIMs with eliminating desserts in the congressional cafeteria.
/Salute
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.