Why The FISA Amendment And What are Dems Up To In The FISA Debate?
A special court that has routinely approved eavesdropping operations has put new restrictions on the ability of U.S. spy agencies to intercept e-mails and telephone calls of suspected terrorists overseas, U.S. officials said Wednesday.
Russ Feingold has this to say on the proposed FISA amendment:
We need to wiretap terrorists, and we should address the problem that has been identified with FISA with respect to foreign-to-foreign communications. But the administration’s overly broad proposal goes far beyond that and would leave critical decisions related to surveillance involving Americans entirely up to the Attorney General. The proposal from the Democratic leadership is better and involves FISA court review from the start. But it does not have adequate safeguards to protect Americans’ privacy. The bill should also include a 90-day sunset to ensure Congress has the chance to identify and fix any problems with this new proposal
I am beginning to believe that regarding the FISA debate the Congressional Democrats are trying to stake a position unacceptable to the Bush Administration while covering their perceived vulnerability if a terrorist attack occurs during the recess.
The basic proposition is a 90 day approval but no Gonzales doing the review. But what if Bush plays chicken? I suspect, unfortunately, the Dems will crack. They are too fearful of Bush on the question of terrorism. I hope I am wrong. We'll see.
< Malicious Prosecution | Yearly Kos Day 1.5 > |