GovernmentExecutive.com

House Democrats unveiled legislation Tuesday to rein in the Bush administration's spying activities by requiring more review from a secret court but not specific warrants when communications of U.S. citizens are intercepted.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., portrayed the bill as a compromise between giving the administration the tools to protect the country from terrorists while limiting broad powers Congress gave the White House in August under a temporary measure to reauthorize the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

"We don't think we're rolling over to the Bush administration at all," Hoyer said. "This is a carefully constructed balance."

House leaders laid out an aggressive schedule for moving the bill, with the Judiciary and Intelligence committees scheduled to mark it up Wednesday and floor action planned for next week. Two months ago, Democrats said they were forced into a corner by the administration and agreed to pass the temporary bill but planned to roll back the administration's eavesdropping powers when a permanent bill was considered.

The heart of the bill would require the administration to get a blanket warrant from the secret FISA court to monitor the phone calls or e-mails of suspected foreign terrorists when those communications pass through U.S. telecommunications networks or involve a U.S. citizen. Each blanket warrant -- or basket warrant -- would apply to a specific group of suspected foreign terrorists and be good for one year.

The administration could seek as many blanket warrants as it wanted. The administration would not be required to get a warrant to monitor the phone calls or e-mails of U.S. citizens. Instead, the administration would have to minimize the collection of communications by U.S. individuals.

Democratic aides said the FISA court would be expected to approve the administration's procedures for minimizing those communications when applying for a basket warrant. The administration would be required to get a warrant, however, if a citizen became the target of an investigation.

The bill would also give the administration emergency authority to monitor communications of foreign suspects for up to 45 days before getting approval from the FISA court. The bill's provisions would expire at the end of 2009.

COMMENTS

• I must agree with Rick H. This legislation has no teeth. The Blue dogs have greatly disappointed me. The only means to guarding the guards is to force a REAL review process at some point; with the ability to stop any illegal actions (please read that which is counter to Constitutional guarantees and the Bill of Rights). Preferably, this should be sooner in the process than later. Robert Bragaw was correct in his analysis. The original FISA was a compromise and its main constituents (the Republican majority) were so worried about its implementation that they built in the sunset clause. Simply increasing the review time should alleviate any problems LEO’s have UNLESS the quantity of data and information is so vast they can not assemble it in the given time. If the search is specific, they would have such time. These searches are anything but specific; acting as long-line fishing drag nets capturing anything and everything their capacity and access can handle. How are we going to ensure that American freedoms remain with the use of basket subpoenas? Will there be a list of the “observed” available for the FISA courts perusal? Must they (FISA court) make a Thursday appointment so the intelligence agencies can have all their info laid out for review? How can they distinguish what may or may not be legal in an environment (judicially speaking) where people can just be whisked away with no representation (IAW the US PATRIOT Act)? Without forcing a one-to-one justification of surveillance, regardless of time lag, there is no oversight. The intelligence branches are even now tied directly into the regional public/private telecommunications companies’ networks recording and running their voice and data search programs. These instances have been exposed in these GovExec articles and others across the nation. That is the reason the Administration is trying to get the telecoms exempted from invasion of privacy lawsuits. Tip off Posted October 15, 2007 1:20 PM
• What a load of hooey !! This legislation still allows the government wide-open access to all U.S. Citizens communications. They have to scan everything before they determine whether they want/need acutal warrants. Thank you House/Senate Democrats for once again showing up how little you care for the rights of your fellow citizens. Rick H Posted October 12, 2007 12:17 PM
• As we struggle to know our domestic enemies. No, matter your political party affiliation, and setting aside your thoughts on issues. We all need to remember what it is to be an American Citizen. We need to make sure our elected representatives obey their Oath of Office and keep their Oath of Allegiance. See tinyurl dot com/2znnvl Know whom you are voting for. Dr Coles Posted October 10, 2007 5:28 PM