WASHINGTON -- The Senate rejected Democratic attempts yesterday to scale back expansion of the government's powers to monitor phone calls and e-mail as part of its efforts to fight terrorism.
Senators also voted to immunize telecommunications companies from lawsuits for their role in aiding the government's warrantless eavesdropping program.
The bill, comprising amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, now goes to the House for a potential showdown. The House version offers no protection for the telecom industry and more restrictions on government power. President Bush has threatened to veto the bill unless it is close to the Senate version.
FISA provides a framework for eavesdropping on communications by foreign agents operating within and outside the U.S. It typically forces the government to obtain a court order from a secret intelligence court before a wiretap can be put in place.
The Senate-approved bill, however, would go further. It succeeds the so-called Protect America Act, hastily passed by Congress last year as a replacement for the administration's warrantless wiretapping program put in place after the Sept. 11 attacks. That program was mothballed by the National Security Agency after it came to light through media reports. The Senate legislation would allow government agents in certain circumstances to monitor communications without first obtaining a warrant.
Most controversially, the Senate version contains a provision that grants such large telecommunications companies as AT&T; and Verizon retroactive civil immunity for allegedly cooperating with the NSA after Sept. 11. About 40 lawsuits have been filed against the companies alleging violations of wiretapping and privacy laws.
The immunity provision was fought bitterly by a cadre of senators, led by Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, who spent more than 20 hours on the Senate floor trying to persuade his colleagues to strike the provision. Dodd called the bill a "travesty."
Wisconsin Democrat Sen. Russ Feingold, who opposes many aspects of the legislation, labeled the bill "dangerous."
The amendment to strike the immunity provision was rejected 61-37, with the likely Republican presidential nominee, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, supporting immunity. One of the leading Democratic presidential contenders, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, opposed it, while the other, Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York, did not vote.
"Instead of allowing the courts to apply that law to the facts, instead of allowing judges to decide whether the companies deserve immunity for acting appropriately," Feingold told the Senate, "this bill sends the message that companies need not worry about complying with questionable government requests in the future because they will be bailed out."
The bill was approved on a final vote of 68-29.
The White House praised the Senate bill, with spokeswoman Dana Perino saying it will "permanently close the intelligence gap ... in our intelligence-gathering system and provide the tools that our intelligence community needs in order to help protect America."
Proponents of the immunity provision argued that it unfairly penalized large telecom companies for honoring government requests for help during a time of war and that withholding immunity would have discouraged such cooperation in the future.
The bill's proponents point to the new requirement that a warrant be obtained before an American can be targeted while overseas as evidence that the Senate took civil liberties concerns seriously.
The House version of the bill, however, lacks the immunity clause, and differs from the Senate version in fundamental respects. And the clock is ticking. Congress is operating under a two-week extension to reauthorize the Protect America Act that expires Saturday.
James Oliphant writes for the Chicago Tribune.