I’ve previously praised Rush Holt before for his thoughtful and energetic leadership on behalf of civil liberties issues. Over at TPM Cafe, he’s got a post explaining why he will not be supporting the FISA “compromise” tomorrow:
In reviewing the FISA legislation now under consideration, it is clear to me that it does not meet the criteria or the principles I shared with you earlier.
The bill lacks the very specific “reverse targeting” protections I secured in the two previous House FISA bills we’ve passed. This goes to the issue of not being precise in who we are targeting. It appears to me that innocent Americans who are not “targeted” still may have their communications intercepted with ultimately damaging results.
Also, the telecom immunity provisions are tilted in favor of the government and telecommunication firms, not the citizens. If enacted, this bill will ensure the plaintiffs never get their day in court. This bill contains an “exigent circumstances” provision–something so broad and undefined that virtually anything could be considered an “exigent circumstance.” That is not the way to conduct targeted intelligence collection designed to provide us with reliable, actionable intelligence on verified bad actors.
This bill also has a four year sunset provision, which is entirely too long and which would have the effect of tying the hands of the next Congress and the next President in terms of making changes to the law.
I agree with others who have commented that we have time to get this right. We do. The existing FISA statute has served us well and will continue to do so until we pass a more balanced FISA reform bill. This is not that bill.
Quite so. It’s too bad the majority of Holt’s colleagues don’t seem inclined to listen.
The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.