Here is the email I received today from Claire McCaskill regarding the FISA and telecom immunity. I contacted her a few weeks ago by phone and email. Below is my response, I hope making her and my emails public it will shed some more light on this issue.
Dear Mr. Williams:
Thank you for contacting me regarding efforts to revise the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, also known as FISA. I appreciate hearing from you, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.
On February 12, 2008, after months of debate, the Senate passed the FISA Amendments Act of 2007 (S.2248) by a vote of 68-29. I voted in favor of this effort to modernize the 30-year-old FISA in order to allow us to effectively monitor terrorist communications overseas.
As the FISA Amendments Act was debated on the Senate floor, I voted in favor of three amendments introduced by Senator Feingold (D-WI), all of which sought to add further safeguards against Executive Branch surveillance on innocent Americans. Unfortunately, these amendments failed to garner enough votes to pass. However, the Senate-passed FISA Amendments Act does include several measures to improve our national security without violating the constitutionally protected privacy rights and civil liberties of law-abiding Americans. For example, it would require the government to obtain a warrant whenever the target of surveillance is a U.S. citizen as well as bolster the authority of the FISA courts to oversee the eavesdropping activities of the National Security Agency.
As you may know, I joined 18 other Democrats in voting against Senator Dodd’s (D-CT) amendment to remove provisions granting retroactive immunity to the telecommunications companies (telecoms) that cooperated with the Bush Administration’s wiretapping program. Please keep in mind that this is a limited immunity that applies solely to the telecoms, not the government. I just don’t think we should punish these companies for their good-faith reliance on government assurances that they were assisting in a legal effort to combat terrorism. If the government violated our surveillance laws by eavesdropping without the necessary warrants, then it is the Administration – not the telecoms – that needs to be held accountable. That’s why I supported Senator Specter’s (R-PA) amendment, which would have substituted the federal government in place of telecoms as the defendant in lawsuits, allowing existing legal actions to move forward in an appropriate manner. While this measure was rejected, the underlying legislation would still allow citizens to sue the government for past violations and telecoms for future violations of the new law. As your United States Senator, I remain determined to get to the bottom of any government misconduct.
Currently, the Senate-passed FISA legislation needs to be reconciled with the House-passed version. I will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind as Congress continues to debate this important issue.
Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future regarding other matters of interest or concern to you.
All best,
Senator Claire McCaskill
Here is my response:
Thanks for your email regarding the FISA bill. I understand your argument regarding telecom immunity but humbly disagree. I am concerned that giving immunity sets a precedent that the executive branch can tell corporations what they need and the corporations will automatically get a trump card against any law suits should they give the executive branch what they asked for.
There are two issues here, one, the executive branch needs more oversight from the legislative. I hope that the bill proposed will do this. Two, corporations should consider the legality of their actions before taking them regardless of who is asking. The latter is something that this immunity directly effects, giving immunity allows them to act without thinking about the ethical and legal issues surround the actions.
From what I understand (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm) Qwest communications was the only telecom to not comply according to the mentioned article “it was uneasy about the legal implications of handing over customer information to the government without warrants”. This type of protection of customer data should be commended and I wish the other telcoms would have done the same.
Lastly, as a consumer and citizen I believe that the wiretaps need to be investigated. Since everyones data (internet usage, email and phone services) was effected by these wiretaps we should know, as owners of that data, the extent of this operation.
I hope this finds you in good health and spirits. Thank you for taking the time to listen to a constituent.
-Joseph Williams
Support the EFF and Senator Dodd’s fight against telecom immunity and the encroachment on our privacy by our own government.
Here is what i don’t understand. If you have nothing to hide, why do you care? It may be over simplifying the situations, but seriously. If the government wants to read my emails, listed to my phone, and all that good stuff, they are just wasting time.
Am I missing the big picture?
I hear you Brian, like you I have nothing to hide. To me the issue isn’t whether or not I have anything hide it is whether or not the government should be able to have access to my private information without my permission or at least without a warrant. Just like you wouldn’t want a police officer searching you house without a warrant I don’t want the government searching my email. Realistically, there is more private information on my laptop than the whole of my apartment. Hope this makes sense.
I think what Joe is worried about and a lot of other citizens including my self is the abuse against the Bill of Rights, and when will it end .I’m afraid this is just the beginning
When, in the history of mankind, has a leader been given a power and not ended up abusing it? It may not happen this administration, or the next, or the next, but eventually someone will abuse this ability to swing an election, or promote a war on false premise, or intimidate and blackmail their political opponents. A guy who realized this named Thomas Jefferson once said “Those who would sacrifice a little liberty for a little security deserve neither.” I’d have to say I agree.
It was Benjamin Franklin who said that quote but you have the right idea.
Wrong. Everyone has something to hide. Be it your son or daughter’s mistakes (drugs, relationships, underage drinking, a fight at school that can be spun any which way) or your own (accidentally giving to a charity that has some member somewhere associated with extreme causes, mistakes on taxes that can be construed as fraudulent, platonic but affectionate emails to a coworker that can be framed as an extramarital affair, etc).
This isn’t a Hollywood situation where there’s an agent listening in on the other line. This is a wholesale dragnet of any and every transmission you make on your phone, internet connection, FAX, etc. gathered up by supercomputers which then tag and sort everything into a database for some unknown person to query endlessly to find something *Anything* that can be spun into a character assassination. This information is then kept on file forever.
The bigger picture is not you, who are “too busy” to get engaged and leave the fights that protect liberty and equality to other people. It is to protect those people you expect to stand up for your interests since you are too lazy to get informed and get engaged. We are the ones who will be made to suffer most, and our work on your behalf is exactly what the likes of Karl Rove want to stop. That is the bigger picture you missed.