“We’re on the verge of a significant, bipartisan accomplishment,” he said. “This is a bill that will get a presidential signature.”
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was among those who voted Tuesday to strip immunity. But he said afterwards that the bill has still been “improved” by the Senate and that he preferred to move on to other legislation.
Presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) was not present to vote, but issued a statement condemning the Senate bill. Her rival Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was in the chamber and voted against immunity.
The FISA rewrite has been a battle between the White House and Congress since last summer. The White House has argued it needs more flexibility to wiretap terrorist targets, while many Democrats charge that the administration has trampled on Americans’ privacy rights and tried to force the issue through Congress with little debate.
With their 51-49 hold on the Senate, Democrats have been unable to hold enough of their members together to stand firm. Rockefeller, for example, took a leading role in crafting the Senate bill that protects the phone companies.
Tuesday’s votes in favor of immunity led some Democrats to insist that the final product negotiated with the House include at least some minimal privacy protections or accountability by the phone companies. Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), who voted against striking the immunity language wholesale, said he is drafting a letter to send to Senate negotiators to that effect.
“There should be some restrictions,” he said. “It shouldn’t be total.”
The immunity votes also angered the chamber’s more liberal members, such as Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), who had tried repeatedly to strip immunity provisions from the legislation.
“It’s really a sad day when the United States Senate provides immunity beyond the law to these companies,” he said. “To give them a free pass after they allegedly did not follow the law is just really a dangerous chapter in the history of our adherence to the rule of law.”
But Republicans said they would hold firm during conference negotiations, sticking with Bush’s insistence on immunity as part of the law’s reauthorization.
“Immunity is very, very important, obviously, to get the full capability and cooperation we need,” said Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas). “I have not seen any middle ground that I think would work in practicality.”
Many senators dismissed the idea of another extension for the law to allow more time for House-Senate negotiations. Bush already signed a 15-day extension at the end of January, and vowed he would not sign another.
|
