Wiretap bill won’t protect telecom carriers

Two House panels approved an anti-terrorist wiretap bill that lacks liability protection for telecom carriers, setting up a showdown with the Bush administration.
“Americans are willing to make sacrifices to meet true national security imperatives, but they should not give up their rights unnecessarily, just to allow one political party to score points,” said Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. “This bill . successfully provides the national security tools needed to go after terrorists and protects vital rights of Americans. The bill’s opponents know this, but find it more convenient to pretend otherwise.”
Bush hints at veto
President Bush put the Democratic-led Congress on notice that the legislation needs to contain key provisions, strongly suggesting he will veto the measure otherwise.
“My administration will work with members of Congress from both sides of the aisle to reach an agreement on a bill that will allow us to protect our country,” Bush stated. “The final bill must meet certain criteria: It must give our intelligence professionals the tools and flexibility they need to protect our country. It must keep the intelligence gap firmly closed, and ensure that protections intended for the American people are not extended to terrorists overseas who are plotting to harm us. And it must grant liability protection to companies who are facing multibillion-dollar lawsuits only because they are believed to have assisted in the efforts to defend our nation following the 9/11 attacks.”
Bush said he would take his cue from national intelligence Director Mike McConnell whether to veto or sign the legislation.
ACLU holds telecoms accountable
“Why is the president of the United States trying to get the telecommunications companies off the hook for their illegal activity? He is supposed to be upholding laws, not encouraging companies to break them,” said Caroline Frederickson, federal legislative director of the American Civil Liberties Union. “Businesses that break the law should be held accountable. We expect these companies to keep our personal information private, and if they break the law, there should be consequences-not a re-write of the rule book.”
Added Frederickson: “The House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees wisely rejected the president’s efforts to carry the water for the telecom companies and voted down an amendment that would add telecom amnesty to the bill. Members of Congress should not re-write laws just to get giant companies off the hook. They were elected to represent the American people, not big business.”
There are rumblings that conservative House Democrats and possibly even the House leadership are open to negotiations with the White House on liability protection for telecom carriers. However, remarks of House Majority Leader Steny (D-Md.) do not make that prospect appear promising.
“The president . demanded retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that possibly violated privacy laws in turning over consumer information. It would be grossly irresponsible for Congress to immunize companies without knowing whether their conduct was legal or not,” Hoyer stated. “Congress should not blindly grant blanket immunity for such a serious matter.”
Internet tax moratorium
Separately, the House Judiciary Committee passed a bill extending for four years the Internet tax moratorium. Republicans, the wireless industry and others want to permanently ban Internet access taxes.
Meantime, the House Intelligence Committee also passed the RESTORE (Responsible Electronic Surveillance that is Overseen, Reviewed and Effective) measure.
“We’ve put the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) . back in business after President Bush and Vice President Cheney secretly put it out of business six years ago,” said Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. “This bill gives strong tools to our intelligence professionals while upholding constitutional protections for all Americans.”
The bill is now headed for a vote on the House floor. Rep. Rush Holt (D-N.J.) has been pushing a competing bill with even more privacy safeguards than those in the bill passed by the two House committees.
“What separates our government from the totalitarian ones we despise is that they spy on their citizens in the name of national security,” said Holt. “We must hold tight to the structure of checks and balances, where the court makes sure that the surveillance and enforcement arms of our government are actually protecting Americans.”