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.
[...]
full --
<http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/rospars/gGxsZF/commentary>
......
Which leads to a question: just how 'empowered' will this "independent monitor" be to prevent abuses?
Perhaps the ACLU has the answer:
The FISA Amendments Act:
* Gives the president broad new powers to spy on innocent Americans' phone calls and emails – even when they have no connection to terrorism. It legalizes mass, untargeted and unwarranted spying on our international phone calls and emails.
* Restricts judicial oversight of the surveillance program. The FISA court will not know who, what or where will actually be monitored, and the government can continue a spying program even after it has been denied by the court.
* Provides retroactive immunity to the telecommunications companies for their role in the president's domestic spying program. The test in the bill is not whether government certifications sent to the companies were actually legal – only whether they were issued.
[...]
full at --
<http://www.aclu.org/safefree/spying/35872res20080701.html>
and the Bill itself can be reviewed at --
<http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-3773>
So, although the Senator assures his supporters that the FISA court will serve as a faithful and vigilant watchdog, it appears this guardian will have to act without eyes or ears and tightly leashed.
.d.