House's surveillance vote moved to Friday
After convening its first "secret" session in 25 years, the U.S. House of Representatives is preparing anew to vote Friday on a contentious rewrite of electronic surveillance law.
Democratic leaders had originally thought they might get to a vote on the bill late Thursday, but a last-minute request from Republican leaders for a closed session of the House delayed those plans. Congress is scheduled to go into a two-week recess after its Friday vote.
In a closed session--only six of which have been held since 1825--only those politicians who swear to an oath of secrecy are allowed onto the House floor. In this case, Republican whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) called for the extraordinary step in order to let a broader swath of politicians hear classified intelligence information he asserted was key to deciding which way to vote. (Normally, only certain members of the intelligence committee are privy to such information.)
The bill they're preparing to consider, an update to the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), is opposed by the Bush administration, Republicans, and some conservative Democrats in large part because it would not grant retroactive immunity to telephone companies sued on allegations of unlawfully opening their networks to the National Security Agency. Democrats contend there's no evidence, classified or otherwise, that such legal protections are necessary.
After the session ended around midnight, both sides appeared as galvanized in their positions as ever.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said he heard nothing new that would dissuade him from urging the House to support the bill that Democrats have drafted. Blunt, for his part, said the "constructive session" offered "powerful reasons" why the House should instead support a U.S. Senate version, favored by President Bush, which does supply retroactive immunity.
An hour of debate was scheduled to begin late Friday morning, with votes expected to wrap up during the early afternoon. Even if the Democrats succeed in getting their bill passed, however, the legislation would have to be reconciled with the Senate's version. President Bush has promised to veto anything lacking retroactive immunity.
The president (who ever holds the office) does have the ability to pardon any crime, comitted by anyone (even if it does mean their politcal demise), so there is absolutly no reason or justification for retroactive immunity to even be considered.
The only reason they want the immunity is to keep what they have done a secret, if immunity is granted the people will never hear the truth, only through the lawsuits and court orders will we find out the truth. This is what they are trying to prevent, it has nothing to do with the lawsuits, or fines, or crimes, because the they can be pardoned for those.
Do not let this happen! flood your senators and representatives with letters and E-Mails:
!!!! NO RETROACTIVE OR FORWARD IMMUNITY!!!
We need the truth, we need laws to be respected, there needs to be legal recourse to address injustice such as this.
- Great comment
- by masonx March 14, 2008 12:11 PM PDT
- All true. Keep spreading the word. The only comment I have is that impeachment might weaken the increasing demand to have Bush & Co. prosecuted for treason after he leaves office and can't pardon his co-conspirators. The benefit of such prosecutions is the example they would have on deterring future opportunistic presidential cabals from taking advantage of the Executive Branch the way Bush has.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(4 Comments)