|
The Senate beat back a series of Democratic amendments Tuesday on a bill overhauling surveillance law, signaling a difficult conference with the House. The Senate is considering an overhaul of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that includes retroactive immunity for the telecommunications firms that took part in the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program. The Democratic-written House bill does not contain any immunity provision. The carriers face around 40 lawsuits related to the program, and the White House has repeatedly stated that it will veto any bill that does not include immunity. The Senate rejected, 31-67, an amendment by Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) that would have stricken the immunity language completely from the bill. Another amendment, a measure sponsored by Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) that would have substituted the government as the defendant in the lawsuits, failed 30-68. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) offered another compromise measure that would have had the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court decide when retroactive immunity would be justified, but that also fell, 41-57. In addition, the Senate rejected three other amendments that would have strengthened the court’s oversight of the program. Final passage is expected later Tuesday. Despite the string of defeats, Democrats said they hope to reinsert at least some limited civil liberty safeguards during conference meetings with the House. “There need to be more protections,” said Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.). “Civil liberties are very important to my constituents. They don't like the idea of the government having such wide latitude.” “It’s really a sad day when the United States Senate provides immunity beyond the law to these companies,” said Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), who authored or co-sponsored several of the defeated amendments. “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 GOP senators indicated they would attempt to hold firm against any last-minute changes, saying there was little if any room for compromise on the immunity issue. “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.” |
