House Democrats back away from wiretap reform plan
In the face of a presidential veto threat, Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives pushed off a scheduled vote Wednesday on legislation designed to limit warrantless wiretapping.
The Democratic acquiescence was a victory for President Bush, who said last week that the proposal was unacceptable to him.
Opposition had come from both sides. Republicans had savaged the proposal as harmful to national security. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said on Wednesday that the delay was "bad news for Osama bin Laden and other terrorists," thereby illustrating McCullagh's Law in action. Meanwhile, privacy advocates, including the American Civil Liberties Union, said it was unconstitutional because it fails to require individual warrants.
In addition, Senate Democrats reportedly have reached an accommodation with the White House that would include full retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies and Internet service providers. Bush had said last week that immunity was non-negotiable.
This immunity seems a little difficult to defend, as I wrote a few days ago. If a company knowingly violated a privacy law, and the law is a reasonable one, why not hold it responsible? If AT&T is rewarded with immunity for its alleged complicity with the National Security Agency, it's is far more likely to ignore privacy laws in the future. (And if it followed the law, it has no need of retroactive immunity.)
What's surprising in this debate over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is that House Democrats are on the defensive even though the Rocky Mountain News revealed last week that the Bush administration had tried to pressure Qwest into opening its network in February 2001--seven months before the attacks on September 11, 2001.
But even with that evidence, and a chastened Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell rescinding his claims about the need for more snooping powers, the Democrats still got rolled.
Declan McCullagh, CNET News' chief political correspondent, chronicles the intersection of politics and technology. He has covered politics, technology, and Washington, D.C., for more than a decade, which has turned him into an iconoclast and a skeptic of anyone who says, "We oughta have a new federal law against this." E-mail Declan. 
Party uses "Bait and Switch" in campaigns to get elected. They
promise to end the war, "give back your personal freedom", and
take care of the "children", and then when they roll into
Washington, they see the reality of what needs to be done
(mostly), and go on to forget what was told to the groups that
they own (Blacks, Gays, NOW, Greens) because these groups will
"never vote for the Fascist".
Meanwhile, we vote for Republicans to control spending, and
look what happens....
You can't control what you can't monitor, and control is the name of the game.
On both sides of the aisle.
New day, same story. Wash, rinse, repeat.
1. By spying, Bush has enough info (i.e. dirt) on each specific congress person in question. A form of political blackmail if you will.
2. Money and kickbacks. If you're in DC, gotta line those pockets with the green ya know.
3. They are all interested in protecting their own power, and that power stems from secrecy.
I'm sure this list can be expanded, but given the lack of accountability all these people in government have, it's not a surprise to me that they roll over on these issues. It's the age old issue of dirty politics and greed, and Americans are no more immune to that than any other society.
- The democrats are...
- by Heebee Jeebies October 18, 2007 12:33 PM PDT
- like the republican's impotent old trolls and that should be sent to the glue factory. We need to stop electing and reelecting these old fossils and get young people in, people with fresh ideas, balls and minds not riddled with old coot and cootet diseases.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- Your correct
- by starcannon October 20, 2007 1:37 PM PDT
- The Republicans have evolved into jack booted thugs, and the Democrats have evolved into spineless yes men/women, both parties using their particular style to further the corporate agenda and dismiss public opinion.
- Like this
-
(6 Comments)Robert