The FISA Miracle

Looks like the House Democrats got their act together yesterday and passed a FISA bill with strengthened civil liberties protections and no telecom amnesty. Considering that there's no political downside to opposing Bush, and the worst-case scenario of there being no bill is not a bad scenario at all, since you simply go back to the original FISA law, this is about as good a job as Democrats can do. And they held their bloc together, which shows great discipline. Greenwald:

"We lived quite well for 30 years under FISA and if no new bill is passed, we will continue to live under FISA. FISA grants extremely broad eavesdropping powers to the President and the FISA court virtually never interferes with any eavesdropping activities. And the only "fix" to FISA that is even arguably necessary -- allowing eavesdropping on foreign-to-foreign calls without warrants -- has the support of virtually everyone in Congress and could be easily passed as a stand-alone measure."

Plus, there's something cathartic in telling the President to go hang.

Now, my only concern is that, when this is rejected by either the Senate or a Presidential veto, will the Democrats say "you had your chance, no FISA bill for you!" or will they continue to negotiate with themselves? Hopefully the former. For the moment, it feels good to be a Democrat. Don't harsh my buzz!

UPDATE: Great stuff from Jane Harman:

First, the world is increasingly dangerous – and the threats from al Qaeda, Hezbollah and copy cat terror cells are real. We must do everything possible to intercept the communications and plans of bad guys and prevent or disrupt their plots to harm us.

Second, the actions we take can and must be consistent with the rule of law. FISA has served us well for 30 years – its framework is sound and, even in it present form, it permits us to secure emergency warrants in a matter of minutes to intercept communications between suspected foreign terrorists and Americans.

Third, FISA does need some tweaking – but the technical changes are not controversial. All Democrats on the Intelligence Committee proposed them almost three years ago in the LISTEN Act.

Fourth, FISA has always provided immunity for telecom firms which act pursuant to its provisions. Telecoms seeking relief from Congress now did not comply between 2001 and 2005. Nor did the Administration. That was wrong, and they must be accountable.

Fifth, telecoms are now complying with FISA and have immunity for all of their activities.

And sixth, press accounts – especially Monday’s story in the Wall Street Journal – make clear that there are up to five ongoing surveillance programs. Congress is not fully informed, and it would be reckless to grant retroactive immunity without knowing the scope of programs out there.

Fantastic. Getting people like Harman to advocate the progressive position on this gives me more hope that the Democrats will not buckle.