Organizing for America | Brian's Barack Blog: FISA "Compromise"

FISA "Compromise"

By Brian - Jul 3rd, 2008 at 7:47 am EDT

Also listed in: President Obama, Please Get FISA Right

Comments | Mail to a Friend | Report Objectionable Content

I had sent in a letter asking Barack to vote NO on the FISA law - specifically due to the telecom immunity ammendment. I just got the response - and the main reason seems to be to "compromise" (with who? the Bush administration?). I say the compromise is between Barack and the Constitution. From Article 1, Section 9, "Limits on Congress":

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

So Barack is compromising his duties to the Constitution (which he has pledged to support as a member of Congress) and in the same breath makes a "firm pledge" to us that he really will follow the rules.

I think that Barack is making nice with some impotent democrats instead of looking to the public for support.

Reader Comments	Comments RSS
Comments are closed for this post.

rebuttal maybe? | Report to Admin

By Laurie Jul 3rd 2008 at 8:00 am EDT

It's my understanding, and please correct me if this is incorrect, that for the last 10 months we have had no regulations in place and this bill will at least restore FISA, which is far better than no regulation of the 4th amendment. Sometimes we have to compromise for the better good of our country. Without enough votes to override a veto, I believe they are willing to at least restore some judicial oversight. This can be revisited once Obama takes office in January.

Re: rebuttal maybe? | Report to Admin

By Disillusioned Jul 3rd 2008 at 8:50 am EDT

Ronna: "please correct me if this is incorrect..."
Here is your correction--
As Glen Greenwald writes today:
"FISA -- enacted in 1978 and amended many times to accommodate modern communications technology -- has no expiration date. The Protect America Act, which Congress enacted last August to legalize warrantless eavesdropping on Americans, had a 6-month sunset provision and thus already expired back in February, restoring FISA as the governing law. Thus, if Congress does nothing now, FISA will continue indefinitely to govern the Government's power to spy on the communications of Americans. It doesn't expire."

Link

Re: rebuttal maybe? | Report to Admin

By Disillusioned Jul 3rd 2008 at 8:56 am EDT

Oh, and one other thing:
We have compromised our 4th Amendment rights almost to the point of their extinction.

For those unfamiliar with this amazing part of the constitution, here it is:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The 4th amendment needs no regulation.
Furthermore, once judicial oversight (i.e. the telecom lawsuits) of these illegal acts is stripped away, you CAN'T GET IT BACK. This FISA bill is Bush & Cheney's "Get Out Of Jail Free Card."

If he votes yes to granting immunity | Report to Admin

By Daz from New York, NY Jul 3rd 2008 at 8:02 am EDT (Updated Jul 3rd 2008 at 2:56 pm EDT)

This post has been removed due to offensive or disrespectful content.

Making nice | Report to Admin

By Richard from Rochester, MN Jul 3rd 2008 at 8:04 am EDT

You may possibly be right about compromise with the Bush administration, perhaps to achieve larger goals, and perhaps the unconstitutionality of a FISA telecom provision will allow it to be overturned in court. I think what we can hope for, and ask for, indeed, demand, going forward, is that we get a pledge from Obama that Big Telecom will not be able to stick its fingers so deep into our personal lives ever again. That's the part the concerns most of us, the most. As others have said, FISA itself will likely not be as much a problem at all, so long as we remain strong supporting Barack and he becomes our President. Therefor it is ensuring that privacy violations and executive power mongering will never again occur, as they have. Reflect that the purpose of suing the telecom industry would be punitive as well as preventive. Both purposes may yet be accomplished, even with a so-called "immunity" provision.

Content on blogs in My.BarackObama represents the opinions of community members and in no way should be interpreted as endorsed or approved by the campaign.