Policies

Dear Friends,
Further to the Duke Law Journal article that I sent yesterday about FISA and how it impacts on the daily lives of Americans Abroad, here is some background on the latest stand that Barack Obama has taken on the FISA reform legislation now pending in the Senate.
All Americans overseas should be contacting both the Obama and McCain campaign committees to find out in detail where they stand on these important issues of privacy, searches and seizures by the U.S. Government without FISA court protections.
This is very serious stuff which could have major repercussions on all of our lives. We certainly deserve the same fundamental protection against intrusions in our homes and communications abroad by our own government as every other U.S. citizen living back home now enjoys.
What do you think about this? Are you willing to do something about this now?
All the very best and take care.
Andy


Obama Speaks To FISA Reversal
by James Oliphant, Baltimore Sun, July 7, 2008
In a message posted on the website my.barackobama.com Monday, Barack Obama explained his decision to support the compromise bill sitting in the Senate that would reform the nation's surveillance laws regarding foreign agents.

The bill, which modifies the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, was passed by the House last month. It modernizes and alters some of the processes through which the government can monitor the actions of suspected terrorists.

The bill, a product of months of negotiation between Democrats and Republicans, also contains a provision that would allow federal judges to grant the large telecommunication companies that cooperated with the National Security Agency's now-defunct warrantless wiretapping program immunity from civil lawsuits that allege privacy violations.
The immunity provision has been a longstanding flashpoint for the legislation -- and it has split Democrats in the Senate. Earlier this year, Obama said he would work to defeat, even filibuster, any bill that extended immunity.
But last month, Obama indicated he would support the compromise legislation. And here is why:

I want to take this opportunity to speak directly to those of you who oppose my decision to support the FISA compromise.

This was not an easy call for me. I know that the FISA bill that passed the House is far from perfect. I wouldn't have drafted the legislation like this, and it does not resolve all of the concerns that we have about President Bush's abuse of executive power. It grants retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that may have violated the law by cooperating with the Bush Administration's program of warrantless wiretapping. This potentially weakens the deterrent effect of the law and removes an important tool for the American people to demand accountability for past abuses. That's why I support striking Title II from the bill, and will work with Chris Dodd, Jeff Bingaman and others in an effort to remove this provision in the Senate.
But I also believe that the compromise bill is far better than the Protect America Act that I voted against last year. The exclusivity provision makes it clear to any President or telecommunications company that no law supersedes the authority of the FISA court. In a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people. But in a free society, that authority cannot be unlimited. As I've said many times, an independent monitor must watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people. This compromise law assures that the FISA court has that responsibility

The Inspectors General report also provides a real mechanism for accountability and should not be discounted. It will allow a close look at past misconduct without hurdles that would exist in federal court because of classification issues. The recent investigation uncovering the illegal politicization of Justice Department hiring sets a strong example of the accountability that can come from a tough and thorough IG report.

The ability to monitor and track individuals who want to attack the United States is a vital counter-terrorism tool, and I'm persuaded that it is necessary to keep the American people safe -- particularly since certain electronic surveillance orders will begin to expire later this summer. Given the choice between voting for an improved yet imperfect bill, and losing important surveillance tools, I've chosen to support the current compromise. I do so with the firm intention -- once I'm sworn in as President -- to have my Attorney General conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future.

Now, I understand why some of you feel differently about the current bill, and I'm happy to take my lumps on this side and elsewhere. For the truth is that your organizing, your activism and your passion is an important reason why this bill is better than previous versions. No tool has been more important in focusing peoples' attention on the abuses of executive power in this Administration than the active and sustained engagement of American citizens. That holds true -- not just on wiretapping, but on a range of issues where Washington has let the American people down.

I learned long ago, when working as an organizer on the South Side of Chicago , that when citizens join their voices together, they can hold their leaders accountable. I'm not exempt from that. I'm certainly not perfect, and expect to be held accountable too. I cannot promise to agree with you on every issue. But I do promise to listen to your concerns, take them seriously, and seek to earn your ongoing support to change the country. That is why we have built the largest grassroots campaign in the history of presidential politics, and that is the kind of White House that I intend to run as President of the United States -- a White House that takes the Constitution seriously, conducts the peoples' business out in the open, welcomes and listens to dissenting views, and asks you to play your part in shaping our country's destiny.
Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That's ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have. After all, the choice in this election could not be clearer. Whether it is the economy, foreign policy, or the Supreme Court, my opponent has embraced the failed course of the last eight years, while I want to take this country in a new direction. Make no mistake: if John McCain is elected, the fundamental direction of this country that we love will not change. But if we come together, we have an historic opportunity to chart a new course, a better course.
So I appreciate the feedback through my.barackobama.com, and I look forward to continuing the conversation in the months and years to come. Together, we have a lot of work to do.
The Senate adjourned before the July 4th holiday without bringing the FISA bill to the floor for a vote. Speculation mounted that one reason Sen. Harry Reid, the majority leader, did so was to buy time for Obama to frame his position. Reid still may offer an amendment that strips the immunity provision from the bill. That amendment is likely to fail, but it would allow senators such as Obama to vote for it and then turn around and support the bill itself.