House approves warrantless wiretap law

[yogib37 3]

y LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 38 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The House approved a bill Thursday that would grant legal status to

President Bush's warrantless wiretapping program with new restrictions. Republicans called it a test before the election of whether Democrats want to fight or coddle terrorists.

ADVERTISEMENT

"The Democrats' irrational opposition to strong national security policies that help keep our nation secure should be of great concern to the American people," Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said in a statement after the bill passed 232-191.

"To always have reasons why you just can't vote 'yes,' I think speaks volumes when it comes to which party is better able and more willing to take on the terrorists and defeat them," Boehner said.

Democrats shot back that the war on terrorism shouldn't be fought at the expense of civil and human rights. The bill approved by the House, they argued, gives the president too much power and leaves the law vulnerable to being overturned by a court.

"It is ceding the president's argument that Congress doesn't matter in this area," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (news, bio, voting record), D-Md.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Heather Wilson (news, bio, voting record), R-N.M., that give legal status under certain conditions to Bush's warrantless wiretapping of calls and e-mails between people on U.S. soil making calls or sending e-mails and those in other countries.

Under the measure, the president would be authorized to conduct such wiretaps if he:

• Notifies the House and Senate intelligence committees and congressional leaders.

• Believes an attack is imminent and later explains the reason and names the individuals and groups involved.

• Renews his certification every 90 days.

The Senate also could vote on a similar bill before Congress recesses at the end of the week. Leaders concede that differences between the versions are so significant they cannot reconcile them into a final bill that can be delivered to Bush before the Nov. 7 congressional elections.

For its part, the White House announced it strongly supported passage of the House version but wasn't satisfied with it, adding that the administration "looks forward to working with Congress to strengthen the bill as it moves through the legislative process."

But with Congress giving Bush the other half of his September anti-terrorism agenda — a bill setting conditions on how terrorism suspects are to be detained, interrogated and tried — Republicans shifted from lawmaking to campaign mode.

After the House voted 253-168 to set rules on tough interrogations and military tribunal proceedings, Speaker

Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., was even more critical than Boehner.

"Democrat Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and 159 of her Democrat colleagues voted today in favor of more rights for terrorists," Hastert said in a statement. "So the same terrorists who plan to harm innocent Americans and their freedom worldwide would be coddled, if we followed the Democrat plan. "

Retorted Pelosi: "I think the speaker is a desperate man for him to say that. Would you think that anyone in our country wants to coddle terrorists?"

She and other Democratic critics of the GOP's September anti-terrorism agenda contend the Republican-written bills make Bush's programs vulnerable to being overturned in court. More broadly, they argue the legislation reflects the White House's willingness to fight the war on terrorism at the expense of civil and human rights.

A Democratic majority in either House would set the balance right, Democrats say. "In 40 days, we can put an end to this nonsense," said Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass, referring to the election.

A federal judge in Detroit who struck down the warrantless surveillance program turned aside a government request for an indefinite stay Thursday. U.S. Judge Anna Diggs Taylor said the government could have a week to appeal.

Edited September 29, 2006 by yogib37

[Marc and Olga 0]

Sad thing is, warrants (from the FISA courts) can be acquired retroactively.

[incanada1234 0]

You know who I'm even angrier at? Terrorists, for making us do stupid things like this in the first place.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The "surprise" I suppose is the disappointing ruling, the pre-election grandstanding is not.

"Democrat Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and 159 of her Democrat colleagues voted today in favor of more rights for terrorists," Hastert said in a statement. "So the same terrorists who plan to harm innocent Americans and their freedom worldwide would be coddled, if we followed the Democrat plan.

This sort of cr@p is really disgraceful.

[incanada1234 0]

I can't stand Nancy Pelosi. Actually, really just add almost any democratic senator's name in place of hers.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I hate asparagus.

[chri'stina 190]

I hate asparagus.

close-minded right winger!

[pedroh 21]

sweet, right to privacy goodbye.... whats next, cameras in everybodys houses? wait that sounds like a graphic novel I read.. hola Republican Dictatorship

[Mirorgate 0]

Dumba$$ed congress and Senate... stupid bill..

[pedroh 21]

so now USA is a dictatorial democracy that fights agains other countries dictatorships?? #######

[incanada1234 0]

I hate asparagus.

Even dipped in melted butter?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

sweet, right to privacy goodbye.... whats next, cameras in everybodys houses? wait that sounds like a graphic novel I read.. hola Republican Dictatorship

its certainly worrying.

[pedroh 21]

sweet, right to privacy goodbye.... whats next, cameras in everybodys houses? wait that sounds like a graphic novel I read.. hola Republican Dictatorship

its certainly worrying.

I guess Americans don't mind being ruled by a dictator..

[kaydee457 13]

Why such hysteria? This is a well thought out bill whose sole purpose is to give law enforcement reasonable tools to seek out terrorists.

[pedroh 21]

Why such hysteria? This is a well thought out bill whose sole purpose is to give law enforcement reasonable tools to seek out terrorists.

yea, but when does a tool like that has been efficient? everytime such actions against a certain background, either race or religious background is used, it fukcs up everything..

operation wetback from the 50's, they deported legal mexican-american citizens.. vietnam, they incarcerated asian-american citizens too (like Mr Miyagi!! he was in a camp).. what is gonna be different now? you'll see soon, some poor arab-descent american citizen will be incarcerated and treated like #######, then they're gonna say 'oops my bad'