More Bipartisan Calls on Derelict House Democrats to Hold Up-to-Down Vote on Bipartisan Senate FISA Bill

This just in...

CAN YOU HEAR US NOW?


More Bipartisan Calls on Derelict House Democrats to
Hold Up-to-Down Vote on Bipartisan Senate FISA Bill


Sen. Barack Obama’s Intel Adviser Joins Growing Chorus of Independent Experts and
Democrat Voices Supporting Passage of Bipartisan Senate FISA Bill

In an interview published by National Journal Magazine on Friday, John Brennan, a foreign policy adviser to Sen. Barack Obama and former CIA official who once served as head of the National Counterterrorism Center, said, “There is this great debate over whether or not the telecom companies should in fact be given immunity for their agreement to provide support and cooperate with the government after 9/11. I do believe strongly that they should be granted that immunity, because they were told to do so by the appropriate authorities that were operating in a legal context, and so I think that's important. And I know people are concerned about that, but I do believe that's the right thing to do. I do believe the Senate version of the FISA bill addresses the issues appropriately.”

Last week, a bipartisan group of 25 state attorneys general wrote a letter to House leaders in support of the Senate bill’s passage: “A bipartisan majority of the United States Senate recently approved S. 2248. But until it is also passed by the House of Representatives, intelligence officials must obtain FISA warrants every time they attempt to monitor suspected terrorists in overseas countries. Passing S. 2248 would ensure our intelligence experts are once again able to conduct real-time surveillance. … With S. 2248 still pending in the House of Representatives, our national security is in jeopardy.”

Ret. Admiral Bobby R. Inman, former director of the National Security Agency and deputy director of the CIA told the Austin-American Statesman last month that “the only way for the country to prevent future terrorists attacks is to increase its ability to eavesdrop on their communication. ‘Are we more vulnerable? Absolutely,’ said Inman,” with regards to the expiration of the Protect America Act.

Glenn Sulmasy, a Harvard national security expert, wrote in the February 15 edition of The Tampa Tribune that “the global technologies of cell phones, computers, the internet, and other such means of communication - which were not, and could not have been, envisioned by the drafters of FISA in the 1970s - have changed the way information moves around the world. Herein lie the gaps meant to be filled” by the Protect America Act.

In its bipartisan findings, the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded in Oct. 2007 that “electronic communication service providers acted on a good faith belief that the President's program, and their assistance, was lawful.” The Committee based its decision to include retroactive immunity for telecom providers in the Senate FISA bill on “its examination of the written communications from U.S. Government officials to certain providers.”

20 Senate Democrats supported final passage of S. 2248, including Senate Intelligence Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Kent Conrad (D-ND), Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. Sen. Conrad wrote in a Feb. 28 letter to the editor of The Fargo Forum: “The FISA law needed reform to account for modern information technology, current patterns of communication and the nature of the threats facing our country. … [The bipartisan Senate bill] does include strong privacy safeguards and considerable judicial oversight to ensure that our fundamental freedoms are protected. … Leaving [telecommunications companies] completely subject to civil litigation could cause problems in vital intelligence collection in the future.”

21 “Blue Dog” House Democrats expressed support for the bipartisan Senate FISA bill in a Jan. 28 letter to Speaker Pelosi, stating that “we have it within our ability to replace the expiring Protect America Act by passing strong, bipartisan FISA modernization legislation that can be signed into law and we should do so – the consequences of not passing such a measure could place our national security at undue risk.”

Instead of taking appropriate action to defend the nation, House Democrats are wasting time on Josh Bolton and Harriet Miers...again... And we will hear...again...that the schedule is just too packed to bring FISA up and get it passed. Because if the bill does get brought to the floor, it will pass...and that is what the Democrats do not want. They do not want America to be safe...there is no other logical reason for delaying this vote.