The Politics of FISA Capitulation
Simple Justice:
If only the Senate could hold off voting on the FISA Capitulation Bill until after November, there might be hope. But the vote will today, and the bill will pass according to all reports. The New York Times editorial board has come out against the bill, which is usually the kiss of death.
This is the bill that was touted as a compromise by Congressmen for whom words have no actual meaning, and will free the telecoms from liability for breaking the law at the behest of an executive branch that broke the law. And that, more than anything, tells us what our government’s priorities are.
Bob Egelko at the San Francisco Chronicle writes about the corrosive affect of politics on this bill, and how our two presidential candidates have both taken the low road to the White House by shifting their positions to appeal to the masses.
Mr. Obama first:
Obama has been an outspoken critic of the surveillance program for more than two years, and voted against the confirmation of its director, Michael Hayden, to head the CIA in 2006.
“No more illegal wiretapping of American citizens. … No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient,” the Illinois senator declared in August 2007.
Obama has been particularly adamant against Bush’s insistence on protecting phone companies from lawsuits. “No one should get a free pass to violate the basic civil liberties of the American people - not the president of the United States, and not the telecommunications companies that fell in line with his warrantless surveillance program,” Obama said in January. He backed legislation that would have barred immunity for the companies, and says he will support an immunity-stripping amendment to the bill this week.
Obama promised to filibuster the bill should it come to a vote on the Senate floor. …