« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Vote Coming Soon on House Dem Surveillance Bill
The House voted earlier today to clear the way for a final floor vote on the Restore Act -- the Democratic proposal on domestic-to-foreign surveillance -- by a margin of 223 to 196. The vote was mostly along party lines. Expect the final vote by late afternoon.
Its chances of ultimate approval are slim. President Bush today reiterated his opposition to anything more restrictive than this summer's Protect America Act. AP:
Critics say the authorization would tie up intelligence agents in legal red tape, impeding them from conducting urgent surveillance of terrorist suspects. "Congress needs to move forward, not backward," President Bush said at a news conference as the debate began.
Similarly, the ACLU today reaffirmed its opposition to the bill, even as Restore has won over some civil libertarians:
“The RESTORE Act does not live up to its name - it does not restore the Constitution,” said Director of the Washington Office Caroline Fredrickson. “When Americans are sitting in their living rooms making a phone call or sending an email, they should be able to rest assured that the government is not monitoring their phone call or collecting that email without just cause or an individual warrant.” Fredrickson added, “The RESTORE Act includes broad year-long basket warrants that require only minimum court oversight to collect the maximum amount of information. Basket warrants, by definition, are not warrants at all. They do not give Americans protections that the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote the Fourth Amendment. The colonists rose up against King George for the same type of government overreaching.”
The ACLU further telegraphed its impending opposition to Restore's as-yet-unreleased Senate companion bill, calling it "reportedly worse on civil liberties issues."
Advertisement
Comments (3)
Dave wrote on October 17, 2007 3:21 PM:Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but its my understanding that Congress is under no obligation to pass any FISA expansion law at all, Protect America and Restore are basically attempts to give the president something HE asked for.
That being the case, why should Congress care if the bill they pass is unacceptable to the president? It would seem to me that the alternative is no bill at all - a result that hurts the president more than Congress.
PHB wrote on October 17, 2007 4:12 PM:I am reminded of Douglas Adam's on the possibility of a philosopher's strike, "Who is that going to inconvenience?"
So when Bush finaly vetos the bill causing a shutdown of the nations wiretapping who is going to be complaining? Its not like the Gingrich shut-down of the federal government. Absent another terrorist attack nobody is going to know whether or not the shut down had any effect at all.
And even if there is an attack it is by no means certain that Bush would get to pin the blame on the Democrats having vetoed the bill himself.
SLOUCH wrote on October 17, 2007 5:31 PM:GWB signed Protect into law in August.