Taken to task over FISA reforms

Democrat leaders in the House have had the bill for almost two weeks, and they have refused to move on it. John Boehner and House Republicans are trying to get the Senate's bill brought to the floor. But Speaker Pelosi knows that if it does come to the floor, it will win, and be sent onto the president. And that's something, in her view, she just can't afford to let happen. So, the feckless leadership in the House continues to play games with our national security. Today, the Washington Times takes her and her minions to task:

Yesterday President Bush implored Congress — and, in particular, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — to stop blocking passage of much-needed legislation to extend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and grant retroactive liability protection to telecommunications companies that helped monitor jihadist communications after September 11. Mr. Bush emphasized that it would be dangerous and unfair to deny telecoms retroactive protection against lawsuits for their assistance to U.S. intelligence agencies. Government officials, he said, told these companies that "their assistance was legal and vital to national security."

Alluding to the nearly 40 lawsuits filed against telecommunications companies that have been pushed by groups like the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Mr. Bush noted that dragging these companies into court could do major damage to national security. If retroactive protection against lawsuits is denied, the president noted, trial lawyers who "see a financial gravy train" from filing suits against deep-pocketed telecoms would benefit, but Americans' public safety would be jeopardized. As the president noted, U.S. firms would face a wave of lawsuits revealing how the United States conducts surveillance against terrorists and that would "give al Qaeda and others a road map as to how to avoid surveillance." Without the cooperation of private companies "we cannot protect the country from terrorist attack," he said.

The dispute over FISA, the president said, is not "a partisan issue." In this instance, he is right. A strong case can be made that a majority of members of both Houses of Congress — both controlled by Democrats — agree with the Bush administration's position on FISA, and that only the malevolent behavior of the House Democratic leadership has prevented Congress from reforming FISA to ensure that patriotic corporate citizens of this country are not penalized for doing the right thing. Before Congress recessed several weeks ago, the Senate voted 68-29 for the Bush administration's proposal to renew FISA with retroactive liability protection.

In late January, 21 members of the Blue Dog Coalition of relatively moderate Democrats sent a letter to Mrs. Pelosi supporting the Senate bill. So, Mrs. Pelosi, realizing that she would almost certainly lose, abruptly recessed the House without considering the Senate bill. During the just-concluded recess, Mrs. Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid scheduled brief pro forma sessions of the House to prevent Mr. Bush from calling the House back into special session to consider FISA.

It is particularly disappointing to see that Mr. Rockefeller, who has generally played a constructive role on FISA and telecom liability, has taken to repeating Mrs. Pelosi's specious assertions that U.S. intelligence capabilities aren't being damaged by the lapse of FISA. The reality is that U.S. intelligence agencies have lost a considerable amount of their capability to monitor any new terrorist groups they discovered after Feb. 16, when the old FISA law expired.

We condemn Rockefeller for his 180 degree turn on this issue. He was the one who helped author the bill, and mounted the offense at killing the amendments that would've stripped the immunity from the bill. Now, all of a sudden, he's back to playing games with our security just like Pelosi, Reid, and the other imbecilic Democrats.

What the Times fails to note is that if the immunities aren't in place, the telecoms won't work with the government any more. Why open themselves up to a lawsuit for the ambulance chasers and the anti-America fifth column in the ACLU? It's not worth it, no matter the cost of security issues.

Think about this: As it stands right now a jihadist in the Middle East could make a phone call to talk to another jihadist elsewhere in the world. We can't listen to that phone call, despite the fact it would come through our switches, without a warrant. In other words, because we have to play the FISA two-step with the FISA court, we're being hampered in the prosecution of this war, and in protecting the nation.

Pelosi knows this is a losing battle. She should also know that if a major attack goes down -- be it here or abroad -- and we would've had the ability to prevent it by having the FISA reforms in place, our failure will be laid at her feet. Think about that, Madam Speaker, as you continue to dill-dally on this vital piece of legislation.

Publius II