Senators Debate How Far to Expand Domestic Spying Powers

Senators are debating Monday morning how far the National Security Agency can eavesdrop inside the United States without getting a court warrant and whether to give amnesty to companies that helped the administration spy on Americans without warrants for five years.

Senator Chris Dodd (D-Connecticut), who tried to stop the debate by putting a hold on the bill, fierily denounced the amnesty provision:

Cooperation in warranted wiretapping is not at stake today. Collusion in warrantless wiretapping is—and the warrant makes all the difference, because it is precisely the court’s blessing that brings presidential power under the rule of law.

In sum, we know that giving the telecoms their day in court—giving the American people their day in court—would not jeopardize an ounce of our security.

And it could only expose one secret: the extent of our president’s lawbreaking, and the extent of his corporations’ complicity. That, our president will go to the mat to defend. That, he will keep from the light of a courtroom at all costs. That, his supporters would amend the law to protect.

And that is the choice at stake today: Will George Bush’s secrets die with this presidency? Or will they be open to the generations to come, to our successors in this chamber, so that they can prepare themselves to defend against future outrages of power and usurpations of law from future presidents, of either party?

Full text of Dodd speech.

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) countered that this summer, the Congress looked at the substance of the warrantless wiretapping and decided to legalize it.

"We ought to send President Bush a letter thanking him for the program and apologizing for accusing him of violating our Constitutional rights," Sessions said.

Senator Jon Kyl (R-Arizona) said that this spring when the country's secret spying court struck down the 'innovative' order that let the president's warrantless NSA's spying inside America continue, the NSA lost two-thirds of its power to track Al Qaeda.

For his part Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin) - the only senator to vote against the Patriot Act, accused the administration again of trying to scare senators into voting to increase spying powers.

Last week, the attorney general and the Director of National intelligence held a classifed briefing for senators on the need for more spying powers.

But Feingold says that briefing resembled earlier false statements and exaggerations about how the law slowed down the nation's spies.

"I can say that several of the examples they gave were simply false," Feingold said, offering to brief senators on the classified information.

He also suggested he learned of abuses of the powers given to the government this summer.

"I have serious questions about how the administration is interpreting and using the Protect America Act," Feingold said, again offering to brief other senators in a classified room.

Shortly after this short debate, the Senate moved to limit debate time on the Senate Intelligence committee's bill, which would grant immunity to spying telecoms and give the administration wide powers to spy inside the United States without a warrant. The Judiciary Committee's bill, which has no immunity and has stricter oversight provisions, will need 60 votes to be substituted for the Intelligence bill.

Any bill the Senate passes must be reconciled in conference with the House's already passed Restore Act, which does not include immunity and places stricter limits than either Senate proposal.