NYT Editorial: Bad Bill Now, Bad Bill Later
While trying to do the wrong thing — shove a bad bill on electronic spying through the Senate — Majority Leader Harry Reid ended up doing the country a favor. He put off the vote until January. It was the right move, but senators who care about national security and the Constitution will have to be careful not to be stampeded into supporting what will still be a bad bill next year.
The issue before the Senate is fairly simple. Last summer, President Bush asked Congress to close a gap in the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act created by advancements in technology. He waited until the eve of a recess, and then, as is his habit, falsely presented it as a matter of life and death. Having spooked Democrats on terrorism yet again, Mr. Bush larded the bill with dangerous expansions of his power to spy on Americans.
That law expires in February, which means Congress has to pass new legislation giving the intelligence agencies a little more leeway in the wireless Internet age. But once again, the White House, aided by some misguided Democrats, is trying to give the president powers he should not have: the ability to spy on Americans without a warrant and eviscerate the authority of the court that oversees electronic espionage. The bad bill Mr. Reid has now delayed would also give amnesty to telecommunications companies that — for five years — provided Americans’ private data to the government without a warrant.
The White House says it wants to protect patriotic executives. It really wants to make sure Americans never find out how much illegal spying their president ordered up after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Last week, Mr. Reid started pushing a bill by the Senate Intelligence Committee that gave Mr. Bush all of that — with a six-year expiration date to tie the hands of the next president. It wasn’t his only choice. He could have supported a bill by the Senate Judiciary Committee, similar to one passed by the House, with a two-year sunset, real judicial supervision, restraints on executive power and no amnesty. A few Democratic senators, including Pat Leahy, Russ Feingold and Christopher Dodd, opposed Mr. Reid, who tried to get around them by cutting deals with Republicans but failed.
(Continued here.)
The issue before the Senate is fairly simple. Last summer, President Bush asked Congress to close a gap in the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act created by advancements in technology. He waited until the eve of a recess, and then, as is his habit, falsely presented it as a matter of life and death. Having spooked Democrats on terrorism yet again, Mr. Bush larded the bill with dangerous expansions of his power to spy on Americans.
That law expires in February, which means Congress has to pass new legislation giving the intelligence agencies a little more leeway in the wireless Internet age. But once again, the White House, aided by some misguided Democrats, is trying to give the president powers he should not have: the ability to spy on Americans without a warrant and eviscerate the authority of the court that oversees electronic espionage. The bad bill Mr. Reid has now delayed would also give amnesty to telecommunications companies that — for five years — provided Americans’ private data to the government without a warrant.
The White House says it wants to protect patriotic executives. It really wants to make sure Americans never find out how much illegal spying their president ordered up after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Last week, Mr. Reid started pushing a bill by the Senate Intelligence Committee that gave Mr. Bush all of that — with a six-year expiration date to tie the hands of the next president. It wasn’t his only choice. He could have supported a bill by the Senate Judiciary Committee, similar to one passed by the House, with a two-year sunset, real judicial supervision, restraints on executive power and no amnesty. A few Democratic senators, including Pat Leahy, Russ Feingold and Christopher Dodd, opposed Mr. Reid, who tried to get around them by cutting deals with Republicans but failed.
(Continued here.)
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home