The U.S. House of Representatives passed a revised version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, last month, despite President Bush’s threats of a veto.
This revised bill would strip telecommunication companies of their immunity to lawsuits that involve information they turned over to U.S. intelligence agencies following 9/11. The vote comes in reaction to another version of the bill passed in the Senate that would grant this protection.
Bush has called it “a partisan bill that would undermine America’s security,” adding, “The bill is unwise. The House leaders know that the Senate will not pass it. And even if the Senate did pass it, they know I will veto it.”
FISA is a bill that allows the government to engage in wiretapping of “foreign powers” (which is defined as a foreign government, any factions or governments without a large number of U.S. citizens and “any entity directed or controlled by a foreign government.” This definition has been expanded to include terrorist organizations).
Since 9/11, the bill has been the center of considerable controversy due to the USA Patriot Act. The American Civil Liberties Union has posted arguments against it on its Web site.
“The [Patriot Act] expanded FISA to allow the government to obtain the personal records of ordinary Americans from libraries and Internet Service Providers, even when they have no connection to terrorism,” the site says.
However, many feel the new version takes into account the need to gather information on foreign power while protecting U.S. citizens’ civil liberties, including Tennessee Congressman Bart Gordon.
“Nothing is more important to me than the safety and security of the people who live in Middle Tennessee,” Gordon said. “And that’s why I have voted to support the House FISA bill. The House bill is designed to keep civil liberties intact while providing the government the authority to locate and stop international terrorists. These important provisions must be considered as the House and Senate work out a final version of the bill.
“The surveillance provisions of the bill apply only to foreign individuals. American citizens are protected from wiretapping and other surveillance whether they are home or abroad,” Gordon added.
As far as the president’s veto threat is concerned, “The House and Senate are still working out differences in their versions of the bill so we don’t have a final version of the bill to send to the president yet,” Gordon said.
One concern of those in opposition to the House bill, but in favor of the legislation as it stands, is the possible lack of future cooperation from telecommunications companies should they have to defend their past actions in court.
“This litigation would undermine the private sector’s willingness to cooperate with the intelligence community, cooperation that is absolutely essential to protecting our country from harm,” Bush said. “And this litigation would be unfair, because any companies that assisted us after 9/11 were assured by our government that their cooperation was legal and necessary.”
Furthermore, Bush claims “the House bill could reopen dangerous intelligence gaps by putting in place a cumbersome court approval process that would make it harder to collect intelligence on foreign terrorists.”
FISA currently allows the president to authorize surveillance without a court order through the Attorney General for one year as long as it is strictly for intelligence information. The Attorney General is to prove to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that the conditions required by the act are met, and report on the activities to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
Bush also argues that the House bill “would establish yet another commission to examine past intelligence activities. This would be a redundant and partisan exercise that would waste our intelligence officials’ time and taxpayers’ money.”
