
Last week Pachacutec asked all of the Roots project members to reach out to their senators to find out how they intended to vote on Arlen Specter’s revision of FISA legislation. If you haven’t yet joined the Roots Project, you should (see UPDATE below).
Cases are currently moving through the federal courts that challenge the legality of Bush’s domestic surveillance program and they have the potential to provide the first substantive oversight of spying taking place outside of FISA. Specter’s legislation would make meaningful judicial review virtually impossible – and thus give the Bush administration freedom to operate as they please without having to worry about Congress or the courts stepping in to check their expansion of powers.
Glenn Greenwald has done a series of excellent posts about this particular bill, but something he said last Friday illustrates how crucial it is to stop Specter from giving the Administration full cover:
First, it requires (if the Attorney General requests it, which he will) that all pending cases challenging the legality of the NSA program (which includes the EFF and ACLU cases) be transferred to the secret FISA court. Thus, the insufficiently deferential federal judges would have these cases taken away from them. Second, it would make judicial review of the administration’s behavior virtually impossible, as it specifically prohibits (Sec. 702(b)(2)) the FISA court from "requir(ing) the disclosure of national security information . . . without the approval of the Director of National Intelligence of the Attorney General." That all but prevents any discovery in these lawsuits. Third, it quite oddly authorizes (Sec. 702(b)(6)) the FISA court to "dismiss a challenge to the legality of an electronic surveillance program for any reason" (emphasis added). Arguably, that provision broadens the authority of the court to dismiss any such lawsuit for the most discretionary of reasons, even beyond the already wide parameters of the "state secrets" doctrine.
In other words, the unilateral executive gets to add another jewel to his crown with this one — and the US Constitution takes another hit. Specter is convening a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on FISA this Wednesday at 9:30am. (NOTE: Specter’s bill is S.2453, and you can read the text of it here.)
We cannot let this discussion continue without our senators hearing our voice. Today I ask that you do a couple of things. First, make a phone call to each of your senators — you can phone toll free through the Capitol switchboard at 888-355-3588 and they will transfer you to the various Senate offices — and try to achieve two simple purposes:
1. Find out what your senators’ position on the Specter bill is and report back on the Roots Project site so we can start a tally of where ALL of the senators stand. (Not just the members of the Judiciary Committee, but every Senator.)
2. Tell your senators that you expect them to vote against Specter’s proposed legislation on FISA. Stress the following points when talking to aides about the Specter bill.
• The Specter bill will gut FISA, a law that whose constitutionality or usefulness has never been challenged in over thirty years since its passage, by allowing less stringent legislation to apply to domestic surveillance.
• The Specter bill will prevent meaningful review by the judiciary from taking place, including allowing the Attorney General to move all pending cases challenging the legality of Bush’s domestic spying program into secret courts.
• The Specter bill allows FISA courts to throw out challenges to the legality of the domestic surveillance program for any reason. Americans can’t be expected to cede surveillance powers to the president without adequate congressional and judicial oversight.
That is the first step.
The second step is to concentrate some effort on the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee — whether or not they are your representatives. Again, you can phone toll free through the Capitol switchboard at 888-355-3588 and they will transfer you to the various Senate offices. Here is a list of FAX numbers for each member of the Judiciary Committee, in case you want to call and FAX:
Arlen Specter, Chairman – Pennsylvania – Fax (202) 228-1229Orrin G. Hatch – Utah – Fax (202) 224-6331
Patrick J. Leahy – Vermont – Fax (202) 224-3479
Charles E. Grassley – Iowa – Fax (515) 288-5097
Edward M. Kennedy – Massachusetts – Fax (202) 224-2417
Jon Kyl – Arizona – Fax (202) 224-2207
Joseph R. Biden, Jr. – Delaware – Fax (202) 224-0139
Mike DeWine – Ohio – Fax (202) 224-6519
Herbert Kohl – Wisconsin – Fax (202) 224-9787
Jeff Sessions – Alabama – Fax (202) 224-3149
Dianne Feinstein – California – Fax (202) 228-3954
Lindsey Graham – South Carolina – Fax (864) 250-4322
Russell D. Feingold – Wisconsin – Fax (202) 224-2725
John Cornyn – Texas – Fax (972) 239-2110
Charles E. Schumer – New York – Fax (202) 228-3027
Sam Brownback – Kansas – Fax (202) 228-1265
Richard J. Durbin – Illinois – Fax (202) 228-0400
Tom Coburn – Oklahoma – Fax (202) 224-6008
We have a real chance to derail the Specter bill if we act now. It is summer, and most elected representatives tend to think that the American public zones out and isn’t watching…boy are they wrong. And in this pre-election season jittery period, phone calls and faxes can make a world of difference on something like this.
Make your opposition heard and bring back information about where your senators stand. Thanks so much to everyone for your efforts — this is truly how a patriot would act.
UPDATE: The Roots Project is an exciting venture regular FDL readers know about. We’re currently not recruiting as we’ve just gotten our terrific new beta site underway that will give all netroots and grassroots progressives across the country new tools for organizing, sharing best practices and collaborating together. It’s a labor of love involving many, many dedicated hours, and we’re not yet ready for public launch. Rest assured, we’ll let you know when we are. In the meantime, please help with this NSA project against Specter’s bill and we’ll get you hooked up with the Roots Project as soon as we can. Thanks for your passion and your patience! — Pachacutec
UPDATE #2: Glenn suggests via e-mail that we also phone our Representative in the House, and inform them of your opposition to NSA domestic spying and the need for FISA and other oversight on the issue. And find out what their position is and report back here. This issue has been off the radar for most members of the House outside the House Judiciary Committee, so phone calls now can be a real wake-up call. You can call toll free through the Congressional switchboard at 888-355-3588.
Related posts:
- CIA Inspector General Report on Warrantless Surveillance Released
- al-Haramain Reply Filed; Constitution, Rule of Law in Judge Walker’s Hands
- Harry Reid Re-opens the Senate Floor to Amendments, but Promotes Unconstitutional Bills of Attainder on “Constitution Day”
- Obama’s New State Secrets Policy is Reaffirmation Of Bush’s Policy
- Holder Refuses to Stand by Statements Saying Violating FISA Breaks the Law





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Fitz.
More fitz. Lots more fitz
Rootz!
Christy
This is a good thing you are doing.
I will make calls today.
Soon as I get to the office.
Kennedy said he’s against it and will fight it.
YEAH!
And I urge EVERYONE to make the calls. From what we hear in talking to the aides, the quantity of calls DOES make a difference.
this might be the single most impoortant thig we can do if we are to save our democracy
I think the dnc has to get on board big with this movement and we have to MAKE SURE this bill does not pass
we have to philibuster if we need to do it, we can not let spector take America prisoner
of all things progressives have ever done to date, this is the one that needs ev every ounce of energy we can muster.
in this fight we will GAIN resources we won’t be expending them.
we need to contact EVERYONE…muhtha, feingold, who will be with us, but we have to make sure they take advantage of their spotlight
last quarter, 2nd and ten and we are much more then one goal behind.
this is it
Its not out of committee yet, so other senators are not necessarily paying attention. Case in point, Collins has not position yet and Snowe’s office is UNAWARE of any such bill.
This has been skillfully done under the radar by Specter. There is no reason to be thinking about it for other Senator’s I think, which is strange given how amazingly little is going on in Congress. What have they done lately except have some staged debates on election-year issues? The stem cell bill was the only piece of actual work going on as far as I can tell.
If you’re stressing RH’s point about the use of secret courts, it might be worth bringing up a recent example of what happens when things are done in secret: the Cunninghams of the world take advantage of it.
Great stuff Christy.
Another point – lhp posted a link a couple of days back to a piece by Jane Harman. I haven’t seen the legislation, but the piece said that she and Conyers have their own version of a bill (I tend to trust Conyers, if maybe notsomuch Harman). Her points in the piece were that a)SHE has been briefed on the program and Specter has NOT (so how does someone who knows nothing about the program draft legislation for them) and b) there is NOTHING about the program that prevents the it from being handled by FISA.
DiFi, in particular should rally around the point that someone who has been well briefed on the program (Harman) as has Feinstein, says there is no reason to make an illegalprogram legal when it can be fitted within existing law.
fwiw.
Kohl and Feingold here. Left messages at their desks with a request for a written response. Which means I’ll get a slightly off topic boiler plate from Kohl and something germane from Feingold.
Shutting my office door and picking up the phone. Don’t think Saxby and Johnny want to hear it, though. Maybe I’ll play a concern troll…
OT- CHS your “Broken” post is a mindblower. I’ve got a real bad feeling…
All in. What can I do to help (rhetorical)?
Great catch Professor Foland at 6:33.
Government does a horrible job of auditing budgets that don’t have any clearance. BTW, this is one reason I really like the Federal False Claims Act. I wish more States would enact a version.
I do not have a website.
I called to the 888# to find out the positions of the two SD Senators.
Sen. Tim Johnson (D)–no position, perhaps waiting for debateb according the aide.
Sen John Thune (R)–aide did not know his position (but I would suspect he would vote yes because the NRC worked big time for him to defeat Sen. Dashcle.
Thank you for the good work you are doing for all the American people. I support your efforts and hope very much the Rove-Cheney machine can be stopped.
Harry Everhart
Artesian SD 57314
heverhart AT santel DOT net
“If I was president, this wouldn’t have happened.”
– Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), quoted by the Detroit News, on the Israeli-Lebanon conflict.
Making the big jump. Gonna call Steve (Specter). Tell him to tell dad, no dice. This can’t stand. Hopefully, this will help. I NEVER ask Steve to intercede with his dad but this has got to stop. Friendship is a funny thing, you don’t want to endanger it but you want to feel you can “go to it” when neccesary. I’ll check in about this later.
These guys are on the Judiciary committee for goshsakes. One thing they should know is that a whole array of laws are impacted by the wiretap issues and that there are CONSTITUTIONAL issues, which they cannot just “legislate away.” At least, not while there are any judges with de minimis integrity left on the bench.
Judge Walker’s opinion out of CA went way further than I expected from a dist. ct in the 9th and they should take note of the number of times he mentioned the fact that whether or not certain claims would fall under legislation if an AG certification could be produced (which negated making claims under the legislation) THAT HAS NO IMPACT ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL CLAIMS.
The biggest problem has been and remains that this has all been structured in such a way that it becomes difficult to address the illegality of the program without jeopardizng good people who are working hard and doing a good job. IMO, whatever gets done in the end needs to include sealed and unsealed testimony (depending on nature) from the people at NSA administering the program and that needs to be given with Congressional immunity. That way you tie up the loose ends of Congress actually getting the correct info it needs to legislate correctly – and no one getting a free pass without Congressional cooperation – while basically taking everyone off the hook for the hundreds and thousands of existing felony violations. Again fwiw and beyond scope of this post.
re: #15
“I coulda been a contender” (except for Ohio)
What RevDeb #6 said. There’s a big difference between 35 calls and 135 calls. Here, you can be 1% of of what’s needed, which is (as our friends in the DoD would say) an overpowering “force multiplier” of your ballot-box vote.
If they don’t ask for it, actively tell them your zip code. This will helpfully remind them that they need to mark you on their tally.
And we’ve heard from our bluest-of-blue-state Senate staffers that they get organized call campaigns from the wingnuts on issues even when it’s well known there’s no chance the Senator will take the position. I was left with the unstated impression that it really does have a long-term effect when Senators calculate how strongly to stand on things. So if you’re in a Red state, take that to heart.
Good Mornin’ Firedogs,
sent faxes to both DC & Austin offices for Cornyn
also telephoned DC office -
Staffer: ‘the Senator hasn’t taken a position, don’t think that bill is out of committee yet ‘
Me: really ? can the Senator guarantee privacy to his most loyal corporate donors ? Can the good Senator definitively state none of their phone calls, faxes, e mails, IM’s are subject to snooping – b/c ya know I’ve written to their Corporate Counsels and am prepared to write them again explaining how Chairman Specter’s bill is mere cover for the WH . . .and nothing out of Senator Cornyn’s office to date ensures privacy . . .
Staffer: Oh Hi Mrs. xxx, how y’all doin’ , the Austin office told us all about your peach cobbler . . .
OfT: Why Is Iran the Biggest Threat, Again?
by emptywheel
“I thought it a good time–now that we have evidence Pakistan is expanding its nuclear program–to reiterate an argument I made several weeks ago. Iran is not the nuclear threat we should be most worried about.
“South Asia may be heading for a nuclear arms race that could lead to arsenals growing into the hundreds of nuclear weapons, or at minimum, vastly expanded stockpiles of military fissile material,” the institute’s David Albright and Paul Brannan concluded in the technical assessment, a copy of which was provided to The Washington Post….”"
I hope our candiates can use this. It’s a huge counterweight to the Rove “surrender monkey,… the Dems want to give the terrorists therapy,” narrative that Rove wants paint them into.
Sounds like HSAT is “all in,” too.
Isaakson (R-GA)doesn’t have a position, yet. And the aide wasn’t interested in hearing my views or transferring me to someone that wanted to hear my views. Sounds like he’s part of bushco…
Chambliss (R-GA) [yes the one that put Osama’s picture up next to Max Cleland, Vietnam Veteran and triple amputee, in the campaign], is having his staff meeting right now.
I’m going to call them both back later on.
cbl at 20 — hehehe Oh, that is hilarious. Had you told them your name, or did they know you from the advocacy? (And where’s our copy of that peach cobbler recipe? *G*)
Sorry for the double post (thanks for fixing) I’ve had lots of computer glitches in this thread and the Soros thread yesterday.
Here was lhp’s Harman link –
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..25231.html
– and a brief blurb from the end.
A far better approach is the legislation Rep. John Conyers and I have drafted. The Lawful Intelligence and Surveillance of Terrorists in an Emergency by the NSA (’LISTEN’) Act (H.R. 5371) would require the program to comply with FISA and would provide the resources needed to do just that. The bill has 58 co-sponsors and has been endorsed by the American Bar Association, the ACLU, the Center for Democracy Technology (CDT), former Reagan Justice lawyer Bruce Fein, and the Open Society Policy Center.
It’s not like there are no alternatives.
HSAT 16–you’re on slightly touchy territory. Maybe someone here has a good idea how to approach it creatively–which you’ll probably need because I bet your friend gets lobbied constantly.
A Greenwaldian approach: buy a little toy Minuteman and ask him to pass it along to Senator Dad with the question, “What would this guy have thought of your bill?”
I don’t know if this is necessarily a good approach–obviously depends on your friendship–just trying to think of a way to cut through the noise.
Before reading this post, gotta share with you the next-to-last graf of the NY Metro article that *ilson linked to, last thread:
My sense of it: both in one.
THIS IS WORKING, y’all!
Okay, now back up top to snag our workplan for today …
[Tony Blair, on CNN, looking 10 years older than last week . . .]
Good, a project for lunchtime.
I already know what my senators will say:
Dodd – with the progressives
LIEberman – supporting Codpiece
Hi all.
I called Grassley. Like other Senators called by other firedoggers Grassley had no position yet. But I made all the points passionately and sincerely hope Grassley and his staff are getting used to my calls, e-mails, and letters. Keep the faith!
In a bizarre WaPo op-ed defending his supposed compromise bill codifying President Bush’s illegal domestic surveillance, Arlen Specter asks:
“If someone has a better idea for legislation that would resolve the program’s legality or can negotiate a better compromise with the president, I will be glad to listen.”
Here’s an idea. Don’t compromise with criminals. Follow the law. Hold the hearings. Subpoena the officials. Do your job.
For the full story, see:
“Specter’s Op-Ed: Cowardice He Can Live With.”
Interesting, lengthy article in New York Magazine about Lamont/Lieberman.
It includes the tidbit that Hillary was cornered by Lieberman on the Senate floor in his attempt to convince her to send Bill to CT to campaign for Lieberman.
http://newyorkmetro.com/news/p…..ndex5.html
I called my senators, Bill Nelson and Mel Martinez, and the staff in both of their offices said that they had not yet taken a position on Spector’s proposed legislation.
Christy,
the Cornyn folks remember me from ‘advocacy’ – on one of our “To The Phones !” threads, I mentioned contacting the Senator’s 5 largest Corporate Donors about their privacy and did so. I then faxed copies of my correspondence to the Senator’s office – and got put through to his Chief of Staff (Stewart ??) Following the advice on the threads to bring goodies, I showed up at both local offices with the cobbler – apparently it was a hit
some morning coffee cake for all the lawyers -
Prof. Kerr gets referenced by everyone from SCOTUS Blog to EFF – thought y’all might enjoy the comments (note FDL regular slothrop makes an appearance)
http://www.orinkerr.com/2006/0…..urt-rules/
FYI – hat tip to Lamont Blog for the New York Magazine story. Credit where credit is due.
http://lamontblog.blogspot.com/
Hillary (D – NY): has not put out position; no press release or press conference re position scheduled. Took my comments.
Chuck (D- NY): He is apparently having a hearing on this bill on Wednesday. Took my comments. Told him that if he votes the wrong way on this that a Joe Liberman-esque primary challenge is in his future.
I will call Burr and Dole…but I can already tell you what they’re going to say. I’ve banged my ahead against these two walls before.
no formal stance from Leahy yet – his aide wasn’t even aware of the wednesday meeting. however (thanks to handy talking points) when informed of the content of the specter bill he was noticably alarmed and assured me that Pat would here of my concerns pronto.
ok, we are in a war of words and even though WE know what’s at stake, the republciann base DOES NOT
they actually believe they are doing the right ting by defending these actions
we have been loosing the war of words and it’s time to start winning it
“the ONLY reason to conduct searches without warrants is if a person wants to gather information that has nothing to do with national security, information nobody would agree they should have.
it doesn’t matter if you think you haven’t done anything wrong so you are not ocncerned, because there is stealing going on.
with this program and no warrants, with no doubt these people can and WILL steal your company secrets, with the financial information they are able to gather they can and WILL take over your most valuable contracts, find your sources, they can out bid you whenever they want, they can learn the people and contacts tou have spent your entire carrer to aquire.
they can steal your trade secrets, they can tell where you’ve been, where you are going, what you are doing, what you have done, what you are buying, who you are buying from, to who you are selling, what price you pay, what price you get, how you manufacture your goods, how you develope your product
ONCE keeping our personal affairs private was a concervative position and you need to insure you keep people from taking from you what they are not entitled
there is NOTHING that would not have been gathered WITH warrants and WITHOUT breaking both the law and the oath this president made to god and country
nothing…not one thing….nada…zilcho…zero…ummm…nothing
the ONLY reason to conduct searches without warrants is if you want to gather information that has nothing to do with national security, information nobody would agree you should have.”
now THAT’S the way to bring the point home to the base
me to me @ 37:
Typical wingnut response: “People who have nothing to hide, hide nothing”.
Blind allegience is a tough nut to crack.
“they can steal your trade secrets, they can tell where you’ve been, where you are going, what you are doing, what you have done, what you are buying, who you are buying from, to who you are selling, what price you pay, what price you get, how you manufacture your goods, how you develop your product”
pretty much the gist of my letters to Cornyn’s/Hutchison’s Corporate Donors – I added that even if they feel quite comfortable/safe with the current Admin., will they feel equally comfortable with the same set up/laws but different Admin. ??
38Dr. Bong says
July 24th, 2006 at 7:27 am
me to me @ 37:
Typical wingnut response: “People who have nothing to hide, hide nothing”.
Blind allegience is a tough nut to crack.
that’s the point, we HAVE things to hide, and we HAVE things we don’t want people to see…that’s the very point of my post
i called senator schumer’s office and spoke to a rep. he said the senator hadn’t taken a position yet but had requested that specter do a second hearing which is the one that will be held this wednesday. i stated my objections to this particular abomination.
I’ll be happy to call my “reps” but…what is the bill number? I am reticent to call my reps with only “Specter’s bill” as a moniker. I want an SB# to make sure there is no misunderstanding of what bill, precisely, I am railing against.
What is the identifier for Bush’s/Cheney’s (yeah right, “Specter’s bill” my ass) free pass bill?
Dr. Bong at 38 — My response on something like that from a wingnut is the following: “Since when did the Republican party start taking lessons from the former Soviet Union on intrusive, secret government action with no oversight? I thought you guys were for less government and strict construction of the Constitution. This violates the Fourth Amendment, among other things. I don’t know about you, but I don’t take my governmental operational tips from Stalin or Mao.” Stand back. Watch head spin.
Senator Bayh has no position on Specter’s bill. It appears he is waiting to triangulate on it.
Speaking of votes, why is it that no one in Lieberman’s office can tell me his stand on the so-called “Child Custody Protection Act” that’s slated to be voted on tomorrow?
As a “pro-choice” senator, one might assume he’d oppose making it a federal crime for a young woman’s grandparents, religious counselor, or other close friend or relative to accompany her across state lines to obtain an abortion. But given his recent track record with EC, who know where he stands on this issue?
Certainly not his staffers, unfortunately.
Senator Lugar has no position…his office doesn’t even know about the bill, apparently, nor about what FISA is. At least the aide that answered the phone is totally unaware.
For those who gets “The Senator does not yet have a postition.”…I’d throw in that the Senator took an oath of office to uphold, defend etc the Constitution. This is not about any mundane spending bill we’re talking about. This is about the Constitution, and whatever is left of it for the future generations of citizens (and the current citizens too, of course.)
——-
Charlie Savage’s lede in today’s Globe wrt ABA/signing statements says the ABA committee of 38 was UNANIMOUS.
Isn’t that rather remarkable in and of itself?
CHS (43):
Hear, Hear!
Called Coleman, Brownback and Congresscritter McCollum (will call Dayton later). So far, getting the standard “we don’t have a position on it yet” which to me is a good sign — it means we can put the squeeze on them.
When talking to the Republicans, remind them that they didn’t like it when Janet “Conflict of Interest” Reno was doing things they felt were Constitutionally icky, and that the way the polls are going, the GOP will lose Congress in ‘06 and the White House in ‘08, and that they REALLY don’t want Specter’s bill to be law when there’s a Democratic AG.
“Isn’t that rather remarkable in and of itself? “
pretty much. last time they evinced unanimity was their ‘ranking’ of SCOTUS candidate C Thomas (lowest ABA rating ever!)
Will be trying Feinstein and my rep later today, but also wanted to throw this sunset commission bill on the table to go in the cue for contemplation. Are folks looking at this?
link
via Talk to Action
Praedor at 42 — It’s Senate Bill 2453. You can take a peek at it here. (And I updated the post above with this link as well.)
O/T
catty but true,
Condi looks like hammered crap on a ritz – this whole diplomatting thing is hard
Huge thanks to everyone who is making calls — thus far, I’m getting answering machines from my WV reps, so I’m going to try local offices next.
The staffer in Sen. Byrd’s office doesn’t know if he’s taken a position as yet, but I’ll likely get a written reply from him sometime this week (if I know Sen. Byrd’s efficient staff…and, if I had to guess, I’d say he won’t like the bill, but I’ll wait for the reponse to say for sure).
Buncha jaw-dropping headlines on RawStory right now, among them:
Flash: 15 current and former members of Congress queried
by FBI on disclosure of NSA spy program… Developing….
Boxer of CA — says she has not yet taken a stance on the Spector bill.
Feinstein — has her own bill. Does anyone know what the provisions of her bill are?
Just called Lieberman’s office, spoke with a pleasant staffer who took the time to look into what I was talking about.
Acccording to the staffer, who had not previously heard of the bill, the Junior Senator has formulated no position on this at this time.
(cross post w/ Atrios)
OT: Effective new video up at Kos regarding Lieberman’s greatest mistakes:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…..74835/3547
Spectre in WaPo today:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..00578.html
Here’s Teddy’s $.02:
Well, Arlen, ya could make the Preznit obey the frickin’ law, or impeach the bastard.
========
Had Enough?
========
Here’s Teddy’s $.02:
Well, Arlen, ya could make the Preznit obey the frickin’ law, or impeach the bastard.
You took the words out of my mouth. The answer is quite simple: obey the law, but if you have a problem with some provision of the law, express what it is and seek congressional redress, if possible (if it is compatible with the Constitution and Bill of Rights).
dweb at 57 — I don’t see anything on the Thomas service. Did they give you a number? Is it perhaps an Amendment to be proposed to the Specter bill?
Just coz the person answering your phonecall is a totally clueless dimwit, you can politely request to speak to a more specialized and informed staffer. Do it !
dweb,
can’t find any reference anywhere to bill by DiFi – in Teddy’s link above there are references to a bill from Rep Heather Wilson -NM, endorsed by Sensenbrenner and Hoekstra (opposed by House dems) and of course there’s always Senator DeWine’s bill – oh yeah, can’t wait
sherocket—nicely done with those linky thingies.
wow, spector is holding himself up to a kick in the butt with that statement
we ALL have better ideas to keep this from “drifitng indefinately”
MAKE THE PRESIDENT FOLLOW THE FRIGGIN LAW, PROVIDE OVERSIGHT TO KEEP HIM FROM STEALING FORM US AND DO YOUR FRIGGIN JOB GA DAM IT!
Hi there from Illinois. Regarding S. 2453, Our Senator Dick Durbin is very uncomfortable with the bill as it now stands in committee and his office said that if the bill is reported out as it now stands he will likely work against it and vote no. Obama’s office basically gave a no comment because the committe hasn’t written final language before reporting a bill to the floor (or not).
Dr Bong @ 38 & me to me @ 37 –
Progressive reply: “Investigators who have nothing to hide should have no problem going before a court to get a warrant.”
in our phone calls we HAVE to put to reality what we wnat stopped
we want the president to STOP STEALING FROM US
that’s what he’s doing with these taps and there is no denying it
that’s the way we have to do it
we have to appeal to the base and that will hit home hard
Dang!
I’ve been emailing myself my fave bits of this thread to draft a script for my calls, but so far the stoopid tubes are bogartin’ ‘em!
Phoned my congressman’s office this morning, whoever answered had never heard of the FISA bill and had no idea what his position might be, but promised to get back to me. I expected better from George Miller, he’s been a decent democrat.
Boxer’s office says “she hasn’t stated a position”, Feinstein’s office says she is offering her own bill and promises it will be tough on judicial review; I have my doubts.
Spectre rolling over, asking BushCo, Inc., to rub his tummy:
Like there’s gonna be modifications, Arlen, even if the FISC finds anything wrong with the program! Jeeeesh! He also says
Were the big mean Preznit and his bully friends BigTime, Abu, and Davey Addington mean to you on the playground, Arlen? Boo-hoo, fierce negotiations! Of course they were fierce, Arlen, proto-fascists on their way to full-blown will be fierce. Fierce is what they do really well.
What do you do well, Arlen?
tell the roots project: (is there a better way to do this?)
OBAMA: NO POSITION YET
DURBIN: see above — doesn’t like it.
lotus — go to file and open the send an email…only don’t send it, just put it down on your bottom toolbar and add to it as needed.
This is news to me (haven’t followed the active cases/rulings too closely.) Based on the District Ct. throwing out ’state secrets’ in the AT&T case, the EFF is filing for an injunction on the NSA ‘program’. Just fyi…
——
http://www.pacifica.org/progra…..60721.html
…”Now, the Electronic Frontier Foundation is seeking an injunction that would order the government to stop surveillance activities until the lawsuit is resolved.”
—–
If that happens, wouldn’t that set the stage for a ‘Constitutional crisis’? Not that it isn’t already ongoing, but that certain institutions would have their hands FORCED to take a stand?
—-
Well, THIS has certainly made the wait more pleasant!
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/b…..ntral.html
[SPEW ALERT: COLBERT]
Sybil,
Cong. Miller’s office -
here’s link to Congresswoman Wilson’s bill (endorsed by Hoekstra & Sensenbrenner – opposed by House Dems)
http://wilson.house.gov/NewsAc…..mp;ID=1280
and yeah, George Miller is usually one of the good guys a la’ Waxman
TSF -
Arlen’s good at crafting ‘magic bullets’. This bill is another example, that’s all.
oh, and Arlen, why oh why do you cave to the bozo who vetoed the stem cell bill you wanted so badly, anyway? Fierce, you say? Well fight then and stop being a coward and lackey. You certainly are not being like the civil libertarian you claim to be.
There’s this big orange blog… that has a ton of readers. I figure this is so important that it should be brought to their attention.
Those of your reading this might want to recommend this diary there to enlist a few more tens of thousands to this cause: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/24/112337/441
I am SCARED SHIT out og obama.
I think he’s another judas sheep who has drunk the kool aid
ie…alito
WE MUST MAKE IT CLEAR TO HIM HE HAS NO CHOICE ON THIS BILL
if he wavers on this issue he is a republican stealing our resources
OT
CSPAN 2 is airing a debate on net neutrality at 8pm ET. It’s called The Great Communicators.
it is critical that Lamont gets the nomination in CT…. provides excellent leverage with the other Senators… “ya’ see what happened to Lieberman? Do your job or we’ll get rid of the lot of you!”
Seems a terrible shame to have to threaten as opposed to expressing our opinions, but whatever it takes to get our country back….
malacandra at 80 — thanks, meant to get over to Kos and put something up this morning, but I’ve been on the phone and working on the follow-up post on this. Much appreciated and I threw a recommend your way. :)
Thanks for the tip, PS — stuff just got here, so I’m off to work on my script.
Email from a friend just now has this memorable bottom-line:
“Fate succumbs many a species: one alone jeopardizes itself.”
–W.H. Auden
OfT:
fwiw, I just sent this to Howard Kurtz for his online chat at noon est. Pretty sure Howie won’t publish it.
“Interested in any observations you have about Tim Russert and Josh Bolten yesterday on Meet the Press.
Also, the U.S. kidnaps people in the Middle East all the time, but we call it “extreme rendition.” Then we torture them at Gitmo and other secret prisons, but President Bush says the AUMF makes all this legal.
When Hezbolah kidnaps two Israeli soldiers, that is an act of terrorism.
Why can’t the people in the Middle East and around the world understand the difference?
Senator Bingaman supports “The Opposite” of what this bill calls for. Senator Dominici’s staff “was not at liberty, I mean, I can’t say what his position is.” Took my info, will have “someone get back to you” on this.
Neither Levin or Stabenow have a position yet. I voiced my oppostition. I talked to Specter’s office and they said he felt he needed to propose a bill, any bill, otherwise, there could be no jucicial review of the NSA surveillance program. I told them that I didn’t understand this rational as there already were several cases moving within the courts and that Spector’s bill would remove the cases to the secret FISA court.
I completely agree oldcoastie at 8:36.
Californians — When you call Feinstein urge the staffer to get the Feinstein alternate bill posted on her website. I also was told she was offering her own bill (”strong on judicial review”) in opposition to Specter’s, but that the staffer didn’t know when it would be available to read.
One – there is nothing wrong with the current FISA; what is wrong is in not demanding that it be enforced and that the administration comply with it. It disturbs me greatly that we seem to have come to the point where the Congress is writing legislation designed to accommodate this administration’s disdain for, and refusal to adhere to, current law.
Two – if the administration believes that provisions of the Act are unconstitutional, or that the president can circumvent the provisions during a time of war, let them bring suit and argue their case and subject themselves to a court ruling.
Oh, yeah – that’s right – they don’t pay attention to court rulings that go against them, either.
Sen. Salazar (D-CO): His staff wasn’t aware of the bill, he hadn’t taken a position on it yet. They said they would pass my concerns along.
Sen. Allard (R-CO): May be aware of it, but definitely hasn’t taken a position. Staff said they would pass along my concerns.
Lotus 70
Me, too, but I just cut and paste them to those “stickies” for later assembly.
If PC’s don’t have stickies, you can cut and paste them into a draft email which should go to your drafts folder when you save it, as long as you don’t put anything in the address field.
A wee suggestion if using bold or italics:
Put it in the middle, not the end, and preview to make sure you closed it with [/whatever].
OT…well isn’t this disturbing…if not completely surprising with this administration:
Click me
Marshals: Innocent People Placed On ‘Watch List’ To Meet Quota
“….was not at liberty…”
An elected official’s staff is “not at liberty” to disclose the elected official’s position on an issue to a constituent.
That gets my blood pressure into the danger zone in a big hurry.
“Breathing now, relax. Visualize a babbling brook with the front face of the snow-capped Rockies in the distance, breathe now. Visualize….”
that’s what we need…alternate bills
but if we are to compete in the war of words those bills need to say what’s at stake in practical terms
not just “violate the constitution”, not just “violate the bill of rights”, not just “provide oversight”
we need to use the language to drive home the point…the bill MUST say things like;
“to prevent government organizations from stealing from their constituents”
and
“to insure officials cannot have information they are not entitled and have nothing to do with national security”
we really HAVE TO start using the phrases that mean something
You forgot to add asking your senate candidates where they would stand on this issue. We have a right to know what they would vote for if given a chance. For example, those in NJ might like to know how Tom Kean Jr. would answer those questions.
The text for Arlen’s bill isn’t up yet. and DIFi’s bill doesn’t ahve a number yet.
DiFi’s position is obviously against Specter.
The Bill should have a number by tomorrow.
Prof.F
Thanks for the suggestion. I called and left a message. Steve is really busy but he’ll get back to me by tonight. That should give me some time to come up with an approach to this.
And if you’re friends with him, you know not to ask about dad. And no one does. This will be my first time. Though I have enquired through an alternate source previously. Anyway.
Anyone that has a ’suggestion’ on how to ask a good friend about something extremely sensitive. Pleas pipe up.
I’d also like to highlight a rerun of an important hearing in the House Intelligence Committee that was held to consider proposed changes to FISA last Wednesday. C-SPAN 3 will be replaying it this afternoon (according to their schedule):
On C-SPAN3 at 2:30 p.m.(running just over 2 hours) it can be viewed streaming online here (RealPlayer):
http://c-span.org/watch/cspan3…..p;Code=CS3
Two of the witnesses are pretty dreadful/incoherent (Richard Posner of the University of Chicago Law School and Kim Taipale of a center for studies in science and technology policy) but two are excellent (ABA President Michael Greco and James Dempsey of the Center for Democracy and Technology, who did his homework on FISA and on pending House legislation to change it from Heather Wilson and Hoekstra et al).
The most enlightening part comes about half an hour from the end, I believe (4 p.m. or so), when Dempsey starts explaining to the clueless members of the Intelligence Committee just what FISA requires and what it does not require (this committee clearly needs to take a FISA 101 class to get up to speed on its intricacies). So that part is quite informative. And earlier in the hearing Greco defends the Fourth Amendment beautifully. His initial presentation is a powerful defense of our Constitution.
The wise advice given at that hearing (but probably immediately ignored by Hoekstra and company) was to delay any changes to the carefully constructed FISA law unless and until members are given a REASON why FISA must be changed by the administration. Otherwise bills are “a solution in search of a problem,” as I believe Rep. Jane Harman put it.
good one, John Casper @ 87– I hope Howie does take it. You have hit a very important nail on the head, imho, and I have thought long and hard about your post yesterday wrt this.
Called Schumer and Clinton’s office.
Schumer does not have a public position on th ebill, but has asked Specter for another hearing on the issue which will take place this Wed.
Clinton’s office was overwhelmed with calls today (not sure why) the sweet little intern didn’t navigate the call, but put me through to Clinton’s leg affairs office where I laft a detailed voicemail.
Thanks angie.
I read yesterday (forget where or I would try to link) that this legislation was the product of direct negotiaition between SPecter Bush and Cheney.
In other words, Bushco wrote it an SPecter put his name on it.
RevDeb #5:
That encouraging that you got that much; all I got from the staffer who answered my phone call was: It hasn’t come up for a vote yet, but in general Sen. Kennedy opposes the surveillance powers the Administration has claimed, especially “wanton” surveillance.
Of course with Teddy I’m never sure whether I want him to be more vocal or less vocal; you can bet that the Administration is going to portray checks on its power as the stuff of “Teddy Kennedy liberals” anyway, so having the Senator articulate the need for the rule of law probably can’t hurt.
lhp @ 105 -
In other words, Bushco wrote it an SPecter put his name on it.
Exactly!
I called all the Senators on the committee and my Congressman’s office, too.
They all said that they haven’t issued a statement on their positions, yet, but would take a message to pass on to their Senators. Only Diane Feinstein’s office said that she was opposed to it as it now stands.
I was very polite – but passionate about the need for Congressional oversight on this very important issue. The staffers were also polite, but many were unprepared to answer any questions about their Senator’s stand on Specter’s proposed legislation. That was a bit surprising.
I hope they get hundreds of calls. It sends the message – we’re keeping a watching eye on you and our precious democracy!!
Typical wingnut response: “People who have nothing to hide, hide nothing”.
Tell them fine, give me your name, children’s names, where they go to school, your and their soc sec numbers, your credit card numbers, bank account numbers, medicare numbers, parent’s soc sec numbers, names of everyone you have ever had sex with, your phone numbers and cell numbers, anything bad you have ever said about your boss(es) and any medications or drugs you have ever taken.
Don’t worry. I won’t use it for anything except terrorist activity monitoring. I will be making copies of this info and sharing with a lot of people, and putting it onto my computer that will be accessible by a lot of people, but probably out of the thousands with access no one will lift any of it and it’s not like I’ve ever misplaced millions of veterans ID info.
Just the government does that.
OT:Big Dog and Droopy Dog
A Rethug perspective from The American Spectator
[Snip]
And it’s Clinton who wants the control. While he has been helpful to the Democrat party, his activities for the Democrats have been limited since Dean took over as DNC chairman. The relationship between Dean and Clinton’s wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, has been rocky at best.
Clinton’s arrival in Waterbury surprised some Democrat observers, particularly since Senator Clinton had announced that she would take no position on the race. But according to the Democrat consultants, that was all part of the Clinton plan.
“The Clintons know that if Joe wins, the MoveOn types are going to turn their guns on another traditional Democrat and they think that traditional Democrat will be Hillary, and they don’t need to give those nuts any more ammunition,” says the Democrat consultant
…love to know who that ‘Democrat consultant’ was…
I just called Schumer’s DC office. He’s still waffling.
new Christy thread: “Do you trust George Bush…”
lhp – It’s so darn “adequate” you kind of knew it came from the VPs office. ;-)
Re: Spector bill
Orrin Hatch – no position at this time. Will post on his website.
Well, HSAT, here’s an approach which didn’t work: College night in our high school, many many years ago, a bunch of us high achievers working our glorious way from one Ivy League representative to another, when our friend Jim got called out of the group for an “urgent message from his folks at home,” according to the principal. When Jim returned, he announced the news to us, and all four of us chimed in, “But, Jim, your dad isn’t smart enough to be on the Supreme Court!!”
Of course, later the Court became known as the Rehnquist Court, after Jim’s dad, but I’m still not sure we were wrong….
Just saying, there are good approaches to friends’ parents in high places, and then there’s this one. For what it’s worth.
John Casper:
The ‘not at Liberty’ hit me too. It may have been a paraphrase, for humor.
BUT, it makes the point in my mind that to let this fester like Specter, and take hold, not only will it be elected officials ‘not at liberty’ to discuss. It will be everyday reality status-quo carved in stone and apply to everyone everywhere at all times.
Not particularly supportive of the free speech aspects in the First Amendment.
Teddy at 115 — omg, you made me spew coffee all over my computer screen. That’s freaking hilarious!
HSAT– just a thought….
Look, with the repug controlling, this bill could likely to go through… but maybe not as it is currently written. I would be curious to find out if there is any leverage to give Specter his “compromise” but completely undermine the lack of oversight advocated by Specter. Or delay it until after elections–if the people speak on voting day, then they need to cover this administration’s ass is gone.
Don’t necessarily ask for anything. Information and understanding go a long way.
oh – I meant to say watchful not watching. ugh!!!
Hope re Steve,
I would start off by saying “I’m worried…” and make it about your concern for the Constitution.
Watch carefully for his reaction and be ready to jump in with a disclaimer that it is an imposition on your friendship but you felt this was so important.
eg at 121
Kris at 119
Teddy at 115
Thanks..that does give me something to mull over. It would be easier if hubby were here, I would have that support and through him is how the friendship started. Big sigh. Just gonna follow my heart and see where it takes me. Steve is an incredible human being and smart as the day is long. Cross your fingers kids.
that was fun… one of my senators is mr lapdog cornyn and one of his aides actually said he wants more oversight into this program. i told her his blind support for anything that furthers the president’s powers doesnt exactly line up with that statement. she didnt have much to say after that.
Hope – left you a suggestion on the new thread – fwiw!
oooooh, TWO Teddy questions picked by Cillizza and Harris in their WaPoO chatz today, and both were on-the-fly asks between shaving and toothbrushing, given that the lads changed their topic from last night to this morning….
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..00904.html
Justin 123
The weird thing about Cornyn is that he’s trying to make his “thing” about privacy.
Months ago, maybe a year ago, he had an op-ed in the Statesman (which probably means in all Texas newspapers) about the need for less secrecy in government.
Yet, every vote he casts supports the most secretive administration in history.
Anyway, we might all lean on Cornyn in terms of his support for less secrecy. He’s on the Judiciary committee.
Lotus
Re: the Clobert clip
I cannot believe he got a sitting congressman to say “doing cocaine is fun because..” and th rest. UN freakin believable
Michigan:
Sen. Levin – No official position
Sen. Stabenow – No one there to take the call (I will be back :)
Rep. Rogers – Took name and address and will send a reply via snail mail.
More Cornyn, which makes my head spin.
More here:
http://www.firstamendmentcente…..x?id=14985
After much rigmarole, finally got through to “Tod[d]” in Mel Martinez’ offfice, who ver’ much appreciated hearing the bill # and whatever else I could tell him about it. So I sweetly (you know me, *g*) made the three main and various sub-points, stressing in particular:
How d’ya reckon biz people gonna like [cbl’s questions], hmmm?
This may feel comfy to Sen. Martinez while BOOSH is still in, but what about After That, hmmm?
Ended up, “Well, thanks so much, Tod[d]. I rilly enjoyed chattin’ with you, and please do let the Senator know what a stinker this thang is, okay?”
“Will do, lotus — yew have yew a good ‘un, y’heah!”
[So back into knowing hide’n'watch mode on ol’ Mel.]
Slightly less rigmarole at Bill Nelson’s orifice, but the aide I/we need to jaw with, Julia Spencer, will be in a mtg for another couple of hours, so gonna try her back mid-afternoon . . .
lil dog -
Sounds like Karl’s got something on him. Dead girl/live boy, kinda like…
But if it weren’t so bloody horrible, I’d laugh at what he says about Gonzo.
Open gov’t means nothing to that henchman.
/Insert screed here./
torure memo
NSA spying ‘authorization/legalization’ memo
responder to Plame leak, Libby case, emails ‘found’ etc. etc. ad infinitum.
/end screed/
I am truly depressed Tom Coburn is my “idiot” senator……..
Thanks for taking the initiative on this.
I just called McConnell and Bunning (KY). Both had not taken a position.
Don’t have high hopes for them, both ultra-right wing, McConnell is at least intelligent, Bunning is certifiably insane.
Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell’s offices did not have a statement as of yet. I was told that my comments would be relayed.
I just called my senators and representative:
DeWine – sent to the voicemail box of the “staffer working on that issue.” I think his voicemail said his name is Ben Franklin. Not kidding.
Voinovich – no official position. I conveyed my concerns.
Schmidt – staffer did not know her position. She said she would send me a letter about it. (?)
I called Leahy and Jeffords last week. Jeffords, no position yet. Gonna call him back again now.
Leahy: staffer said Democrats on Judiciary Committee are pressing for more hearings. Leahy is concerned and leading the opposition to anything that would weaken FISA.
Virgil at 137 — oh, I am so sorry that you have to deal with Jean Schmidt. But I hear her re-election campaign is having a bit of a bumpy ride. Here’s hoping…
You live in a beautiful part of the country. Had relatives that lived in the Warren, OH area, and used to spend summers helping them put up hay on their farm. :)
Christy (139):
Tell me about it. I really thought Paul Hackett was going to take her down, and he got oh so close. I am hopeful even this district will wise up next time.
Warren is actually near Youngstown. I’m in the Cincinnati suburbs. Yes, Ohio is a beautiful place, despite some of her residents’ misdeeds. ;)
“Bunning is certifiably insane.”
amy, he truly is, isn’t he? Is it Alzheimer’s? Sure hope that doc (sorry, forgetting the name) tries again. When’s McC up next?
lhp, you still here?
Wexler will live to regret his Colbert moment (prolly already HAS):
Congressman Jokes About Cocaine on TV
Whoops, nearby sky-noise suggests I better jump off here for a bit. An hour early today, whaddya know.
Just called Leahy’s office again and spoke with a very well informed staffer. She said Leahy is urging the Judiciary Committee and Chairman to hold more hearings to discover what laws have been violated. Leahy believes that Specter’s bill will weaken FISA.
She said (and take note chimpy and dough boy, this is the next CHAIRMAN of THE JUDICIARY COMM SPEAKING) that NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.
I love Leahy. And his staff.
By the way, thanks, Christy for the talking points above, they really help me articulate my concerns. I’m even asking to speak to more knowledgeable staffers and feel confident that I sound like I know what I’m talking about, rather than some rabid rabbit from the left.
carolyn urban —
Isn’t it delightful how (as Adie just emailed me), “Christy, Jane & all make it so-o-o much easier to sound ’smart’ than it used ta be”?
I’m liking it, lotus.
Now I’ve called all the dems on the Judiciary Committee, and is it just me, or does anyone else feel dread and loathing to dig into the Rethugs? I’m just picturing that group from the Alito hearings, the smug and smarmy self righteous set. Can I just call and make puking sounds?
OT: today’s installment of T. Ricks’ new book (WaPo):
‘It Looked Weird and Felt Wrong’
From its first days in Iraq in April 2003, the Army’s 4th Infantry Division made an impression on soldiers from other units — the wrong one.
“We slowly drove past 4th Infantry guys looking mean and ugly,” recalled Sgt. Kayla Williams, then a military intelligence specialist in the 101st Airborne. “They stood on top of their trucks, their weapons pointed directly at civilians. . . . What could these locals possibly have done? Why was this intimidation necessary? No one explained anything, but it looked weird and felt wrong.”
Today, the 4th Infantry and its commander, Maj. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, are best remembered for capturing former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein, one of the high points of the U.S. occupation. But in the late summer of 2003, as senior U.S. commanders tried to counter the growing insurgency with indiscriminate cordon-and-sweep operations, the 4th Infantry was known for aggressive tactics that may have appeared to pacify the northern Sunni Triangle in the short term but that, according to numerous Army internal reports and interviews with military commanders, alienated large parts of the population.
. . .
Carolyn urban at 147 — when the GOP staffers start getting snotty or dismissive with me, I use this phrase: “Former Reagan Assistant Attorney General Bruce Fein takes both the Constitution and the rule of law very seriously, and is a staunch conservative in the Reagan mold, and opposes this legislation on solid, principled Constitutional and historical grounds. Are you telling me that Sen. _____ rejects the conservative principles of Ronald Reagan and is refusing to uphold the Constitution?” I get a lot of stammers after that. :)
Thanks Christy for a wonderful post, full of ideas for us dunderheads who have trubble talking this stuff half-way intelligently.
I used some(!) quotes from your post, tweeked them to interject a bit more personalized muscle, & cobbled them together in a way I hope will help the recipients feel they’ve been ever-so-respectfully poked by a sharp stick. Then I e-mailed copy off to each committee member. MrSpec got hisveryown personalized version, being-as-how he’s supposedly leading this merry parade ;->
Below is what I sent to the others. Maybe someone’s already made this suggestion but, for anyone who can make the time to do so, I’d not only hit all the committee members, plus your own reps, but any with higher ambitions &/or ego-factors-of-interest. (e.g., Frist, Clinton, & a whole bunch in tw’ those) Oh, and for something this critical, I always ask for a reply, if their web-form makes that option available, even if they’re not from my state.
————————–
“my” version (HEAVILY dependent upon & plagiarized from the post *blush*):
Dear Senator [ ]:
I urge you to vote AGAINST Senator Specter’s proposed legislation on FISA.
• The Specter bill would gut FISA, a law whose constitutionality or usefulness has never been challenged in over thirty years since its passage, by allowing less stringent legislation to apply to domestic surveillance.
• The Specter bill would prevent meaningful review by the judiciary from taking place, including allowing the Attorney General to move all pending cases challenging the legality of Bush’s domestic spying program into secret courts.
• The Specter bill would allow FISA courts to throw out challenges to the legality of the domestic surveillance program for any reason. It would effectively CEDE surveillance powers to the president WITHOUT adequate CONGRESSIONAL and judicial OVERSIGHT.
The Spector bill is a dangerous piece of legislation, which would gut the power of the Senate to provide necessary oversight on actions of the executive branch of the government. Congressional and Judicial oversight on the executive branch of government is critical to maintaining our country’s safeguards provided by the founding fathers of our nation.
PLEASE, DO NOT vote to GIVE AWAY your power.
VOTE NO to the Spector bill.
Sincerely, [ ]
Virginia:
Senator Warner: No position yet.
Senator Allen: No one available immediately to respond. One of his staffers will telephone me back. Person answering telephone was unaware of bill.
Carolyn Urban, when you call Republicans, simply say this: “We didn’t like this stomping on the judicial branch when Janet Reno was AG, and with Bush dragging the party down, a Democrat will be in the White House in ‘08 — you really wanna have a Bill Clinton and Bill Clinton AG with all the powers Specter wants to give to Bush and Gonzales?”
aw shucks, lotus. they’ll think we’re passing secret notes in class. *g*
carolyn urban. I have trouble with that confrontation thing too. So I e-mail, rather than risking going all blank & stuttery on the phone.
Besides, I can get to more of ‘em, faster, so cover much more territory if I e-mail rather than try to call.
I take great comfort from knowing a lot of others are doing the calling, even tho I’m not able to be effective in that way.
You can plug up their FAX machines, & I’ll plug up those tubes! Deal?
Just feel good you’re doing SOMETHING. ;->
okbigman here and this is my very first post, so be gentle with me! I called Senator Tom Coburn’s office just now and an aide told me that Sen. Coburn is studying the bill.
Forrest Edge, great first comment.
Comment away. If someone doesn’t like what you said, it’s on them to let you know. As long as you’re sincere, and want to participate in civil discourse, you’re always welcome here.
The fact that you’d make a call and get involved, and report back the tangible results, all those are big positives as far as I am concerned.
Feel free to click on the advertsising as that helps to pay the rent. Cash donations via papal or Visa to the ladies of the lake (FDL) are also always appreciated, if you feel moved in that direction at some point.
OfTHow Do They Self-Delude? Let Me Count the Ways
by emptywheel
“I’m literally dizzy keeping track of the many levels of self-delusion chronicled in this Mike Allen article. First, there’s the expected kind of self-and-other delusion, pretending Iraq is a smashing success.
‘Still, the Administration is ever optimistic. In an e-mail titled “Setting the Record Straight” late last week, the White House declared, “The President’s foreign policy is succeeding….’”
Thanks, everyone, for all the input on calling Rethugs.
Okay, no more stalling. I’m callin’ em.
Bleugh.
I just called Oregon’s Senator Ron Wyden’s office; the man answering the phone said he has not yet stated his position on the bill and didn’t know when Wyden would announce his position.
Called Boxer and Feinstein’s offices. Feinstein has her own FISA/intelligence bill, so naturally, she opposes the Specter Bill. Boxer, amazingly, has no official position yet.
Okay! I’m calling the rethugs on Judiciary committee and I’m really hitting my stride here. I’m stressing what a sound law FISA is and how elimating the judicial review of the NSA wiretapping undermines our Constitutional system of checks and balances. And what staffer can argue with that? I actually think they think I’m republican. They’re all pleasantly saying they’ll pass my concerns on, and BTW, no one is asking if I’m a constituent.
However, if they do, I let them know that as a member of the Judiciary Committee, they represent all Americans, not just those in their state.
I’m saving Specter for last. Speaking of Specter, I keep doing typos: Spectre. A Freudian trip of the fingers?
I also received a “No comment” from Senator Wyden’s office. I called Senator Gordon Smith’s office as well. The person who answered the phone sounded as if they had been asked about this before because he said that the bill was not yet out of committee and that the Senator expected amendments to change the bill before it would come time for him to vote on it, if it ever did. He used the phrase “Held up in committee” more than once.
I also called Congressman David Wu’s office (OR-01). He had also had no comment.
I’ll try them all again tomorrow.
I did it! Called all the rethugs and spoke with all their staff (except Cornyn – no staff, no message, no ability to contact – try him later). Gasp. I feel like a kid who just finished a big helping of squash or spinach or some dreaded dish.
Excellent, Carolyn! Above and beyond the call of duty!
Called Dayton’s office — looks like the other FDLer, Atriots, and Kossacks beat me to it! Dayton’s staffer said that he’s not familiar with the bill, but if it’s as bad as we say it is, then he’s likely to vote it down if it leaves committee. I also told her about DiFi’s alternate bill that he might want to check out.
Just called Spectoer’s office(he is my senator)
First, his staff couldn’t care less that people are concerned.
Second, unlike some in congress, Specter’s staff does not ask you where you are from.
I’m off to call Little Ricky now.
called brownback and roberts, neither one had a position and I strongly urged them to vote against it. like that will help ;-P
You know what’s sad? I live in Georgia, and so I’m not calling either of my Senators because the only hope is that they sleep through the vote. If I call them, they might show up just to vote their usual wrong.
I think it’s sad…
” B. Muse says:
July 24th, 2006 at 7:18 am
I will call Burr and Dole…but I can already tell you what they’re going to say. I’ve banged my ahead against these two walls before.”
I have them too, and I’m going to call anyway (tomorrow early morning… little late tonight). Find common ground, is my advice; make the arguments that this legislation centralizes power in the executive branch for this administration and ALL FUTURE ADMINSTRATIONS. Point out how hard it is to un-legislate a murky issue. Draw parallels (do some research beforehand) to a couple specific actions and laws used by despots and dictators (do NOT use Nazi Germany — overdone and cliche). Ask how much time might pass before a future government expands this even further. Suggesting that other countries or the UN (biggie there) might decide to follow the precedent. I’m sure China’s principled enough to not take the opportunity to get useful commercial information from these kinds of activities for the sake of “eliminating terrorism”. It’s not like they’d TAKE ADVANTAGE of it, is it?
I’ll bite. Exactly WHERE is there a (Sec. 702(b)(2)) in the link you provide to the Specter bill? I see no such section.
I also find on section (Sec. 702(b)(6)) in that link either. What gives? has the bill been amended since July 21st when Glenn made his comments? Is there some other Spector bill than the one you link to? Am I blind to something there in that link? I went to http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.2453: or at least that’s where the link took me. This is the 702(b) I find there: “`(b) REAUTHORIZATION- In order to continue an electronic surveillance program after the time period described in subsection (a), the Attorney General shall submit a new application under section 703. There shall be no limit on the number of times the Attorney General may seek approval of an electronic surveillance program.” No (6), no (2), no sub numbers at all! What am I missing???
Feinstein- will vote against
Boxer – has not stated an opinion, but I urged her to vote against
Rep. Sam Farr – against (and a really nice staffer!)
called schumer..his office informed me that Sen Schumer requested wed. hearing (in committee) and that Schumer will make a public statement AFTER that hearing…but would make no statement about whether or not he supports or opposes the bill before the hearing.
Called Hillary and was redirected to her ‘legislative line” after being told by whoever answered the phone that they did not know if she had a position re: the spector bill or not…I left a message.
Olympia Snowe’s office has taken no position on the bill.
I guess Senator Snowe’s “Declaration of Conscience” can wait.
Senator Durbin has not decided one way or the other on the bill, but I urged him to vote against it.
Hi,
I called Feingold’s office. He has issued a public statement “strongly opposing” this Specter legislation!
Horray. Put Feingold in the patriot category
Called Feinstein’s office. She too is opposed but has not issued a public statement to this effect. She already has existing legislation out there which seeks to close the loopholes the Bush administration has exploited – so that’s kind of a public statement.
I encouraged a strong public statement nevertheless, against this piece-of-crap legistlation!
Called Boxer’s office. No position. I told the aide that there is no excuse for Boxer not putting this one on the front burner – rule of law and defending the Constitution trump all the “myriad of legislation” that the aide said Senator Boxer is considering.
I also chastised her for her stumping for Joe Lieberman.
Called Adam Schiff (my district too) and asked him for a position. He is studying it but has no public statement. I urged one from him as a sign of leadership on this issue – he sits on the House Judiciary Committee. Will call his local office too.
Regards,
Patrick Briggs,
Pasadena, CA
Called Florida Senators. According to their aides, neither one has taken any position as of yet. I told Martinez’s aide that he escaped from one form of dictatorship and hopefully he won’t exchange it for another. As far as Nelson, I described to his aide, who seemed ignorant of FISA, what it was supposed to do and what might happen if the Spector bill passed.