Constant Readers,
In an effort to avoid the pain and suffering of what my friends Meg and Sean refer to as "Singles' Awareness Day," I volunteered to go out of town for work. This way, I had an excuse for having no plans for Valentine's Day. My Mom would worry, you know? Seeing Beth Spotswood's gay roommate in his underwear last night at our vodka and Crystal Light-fueled slumber party is about as close as I came to V-Day action.
And so it with the full knowledge that I have nothing interesting to hide that I began looking into the recent wrangling over privacy. Here's how it works: for about 30 years, we have had the Foreign Intelligence Security Act (FISA). That law established a double secret court ("the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court") whose job is to issue warrants for spying on people in the USA where terrorism and foreign intelligence issues are present. (In regular criminal cases, Abbie Carmichael just wakes up the judge and gets a signature.)
However, in 2002, President Bush signed an executive order that permitted the National Security Agency (NSA) to monitor communications of people in the US who are calling and emailing people outside of the US without Super Secret Spy Warrants. (The NSA maintained that it still had to get SSWSs for entirely domestic communications.) In 2005, it came to light that Verizon and AT&T had been providing the NSA with reams of caller information - much of which reflected entirely domestic calls - without any kind of warrant. However, FISA contemplates this "psst, just gimmie the info" scenario and makes it a criminal offense to "engage in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute." 50 U.S.C. Sec. 1809. It also allows private citizens to sue for violations. 50 U.S.C. Sec. 1810. Qwest was the only telephone company that refused to cooperate with the NSA. (Remember that the NSA could have gotten the same info from the companies by just getting a warrant issued by the double secret court - which has only denied 5 requests since it was established in 1979.)
Now we get to 2007 when the Protect America Act (PAA) was signed into law.
I'd like to take a moment to express how hilariously suspect I find grandiose titles like "Protect America Act." Usually, the more lofty the name, the more likely it is that the reality is just the opposite. Just ask the folks in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Or look at the title of this blog.
The PAA did a bunch of things, but what you need to know is that it basically made Bush's 2002 executive order the law of the land (no warrant needed where one of the parties to a communication are not in the US). AND it expressly allowed communications carriers to cooperate with NSA requests. BUT the PAA, by its own terms, was set to self-destruct after 180 days: February 1, 2008. In late January, that was extended 15 days to February 16, 2008. This very day.
In a speech at NSA headquarters (which is hidden in a volcano somewhere) on September 19, 2007, Bush called for Congress to make the PAA permanent AND give retroactive immunity to the communications carries that got busted helping the spies at the NSA. And are getting their asses sued off.
Having received their orders, the Doozers in the Senate passed just such a law on Feb. 12. (FYI - Feinstein and Boxer voted against the Senate bill; neither Obama nor Clinton voted, though it would not have made a difference.) Yesterday, House Democrats refused to bring the Senate bill up for a vote before leaving on a 12-day vacay because they won't consider granting retroactive immunity to communications companies without getting some more information about why the NSA went around the secret court in the first place. Bush says he will not sign a bill without retroactive immunity.
So, now the PAA has expired (though the underlying FISA is still intact). And Republicans are like: "We're all gonna die because the Democrats love the trial lawyers!!" And Dems are all: "Calm the fuck down, corporate lackeys." I mean, I am proud of the Dems for letting out a technicolor yawn in response to Republican fearmongering, but FISA allows current surveillance programs under the PAA to continue for one year; surveillance "related to" current programs can be launched for the next year; and entirely new programs can still be launched, the NSA just needs to get a warrant to get info from communications carriers. All this makes the current conflict seem a little silly. Like letting someone steal your lunch and then fighting with them when they come back for your napkin. An oddly futile place to draw the line, no?
NSA spies: listen up, 'cause I'm about to make an international phone call to my Mom who lives in the Urban Progressive Republic of Alabama. I need to tell her about why I had to travel for work.
--Melissa
I think a beer with the youngin' is in order next ;)
--Kay, now that you are just barely old enough, I believe you are correct! - Melissa
Posted by: Kay | February 17, 2008 at 12:41