Finding Ulysses

Tomorrow, the Senate will vote on H.R. 6304, the FISA Amendments Act. The name doesn’t tell you much. It sounds all technical and dry and boring.

Go to the Library of Congress. Read the law, and try to get over the obscuring legislative language, and you’ll find that the FISA Amendments Act is not at all dry and boring. It’s rather frightening, actually.

The FISA Amendments Act gives the President (through the office of the Attorney General of the U.S.) the power to conduct spy operations against Americans and foreigners alike. These spy operations can completely avoid judicial review and control. They can include electronic surveillance of our personal communications as well as physical searches of our homes. There need be no search warrant, and no proof of suspicion of a crime. The government doesn’t even need to tell you that they’ve searched your home or been reading through your emails.

Don’t buy the spin about supposed protections that the FISA Amendments Act provides. Read the law for yourself, and you’ll see it contains loopholes a mile wide. The Attorney General is given the power under the law to conduct spy operations that violate the law. The Attorney General only has to make the assertion that a spy operation is following the law, and no court, not even the FISA court, will have the power to disagree. These loopholes mean that any supposed limitation on spy programs can be easily nullified by the White House, and no one will have the power to stop it.

It’s clear to anybody who has studied the FISA Amendments Act that the law gives extremely dangerous power to the White House. What has not been clear, however, is where one of our United States Senators stands on the bill.

Charles Schumer is doing the right thing. He opposes the FISA Amendments Act and has worked with other Senators to try to organize a filibuster.

Our other senator, Hillary Clinton, has been extremely unclear. At first, Senator Clinton’s office stated that she opposes the bill’s retroactive immunity for telecommunications corporations that helped George W. Bush spy on the private communications of millions of Americans. Senator Clinton’s position on the other provisions of the bill, however, was not explained. Last week, however, Clinton’s aides refused to make any statement at all. When the time came for an attempted filibuster of the FISA Amendments Act, Senator Clinton didn’t vote yes or no. She just didn’t show up to work in the Senate that day.

Today, Senator Clinton’s aides are giving a very confusing description of the senator’s position on the FISA Amendments Act. They say that a statement has been issued, but only internally, to Senator Clinton’s offices – not to the public. The aide I talked to said that Senator Clinton opposes the FISA Amendments Act, but that it isn’t known how Senator Clinton will vote tomorrow.

That’s confusing to me, and suggests some lingering uncertainty. If Hillary Clinton truly opposes the FISA Amendments Act, then she wouldn’t have trouble saying simply that she intends to vote against he proposed law.

I’d like to give Senator Clinton the benefit of the doubt, but given the way that 105 Democrats in the House of Representatives (including our own disappointing Michael Arcuri) turned coat in June and voted with the Republicans in favor of the FISA Amendments Act, nothing can be regarded as certain.

Today may be the last chance you have to make a difference. Please help Senator Clinton decide upon a clear opposition to the FISA Amendments Act. Call her office at (202) 224-4451 and ask her to vote NO on retroactive immunity and NO on the entire FISA Amendments Act.