The debate on FISA in going on now and can be watched on CSPAN-2. A source in Majority Leader Harry Reid’s office has provided me with the following outline (edited a bit for clarity):
Right now there is no agreement in place whether various FISA amendments will be subject to a simple or super majority.
The expected first vote that will take place today will be on the Senate Judiciary Committee version (the better version), which will take place around 2 pm EST. It will be a GOP motion to table that amendment subject to a simple majority.
In other words, the Judiciary bill will be dropped at this point if two Democrats vote to table it. Trust me, this will happen.
The way the procedure is set up right now Senator Reid is making the Republicans filibuster on the floor today. If the Republicans want to impose 60 vote threshold on Dodd/Feinfold’s amendment (which Senator Reid supports as he remarked on the floor today) they will have to filibuster and run the time.
Reid has set it up so a united Democratic caucus can pass amendments. Too bad they are not united.
- Right now the Senators are debating the bill that came out of the Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) as an amendment to the version that started from Senate Intelligence Committee (SIC) which doesn’t contain the immunity provision
- There is no agreement in place on whether a vote on the SJC version will be subjected to a 60 vote threshold.
This doesn’t matter because the Judiciary Bill will be tabled and not put to a vote.
- At 2 pm EST today the Republicans will move to table the SJC version which will be subjected to
simple majority- Senator Reid will oppose that motion to table
- If the motion to table SJC version is successful, we will revert back to SIC version which is the base bill
- At that point we are going to have debates on various amendments to that base bill:
- Senator Dodd/Feingold will be submitting their amendment against immunity which Senator Reid will support
- Senator Rockefeller/Bond will have their own amendments which includes their modifications from the Senate Intelligence Committee which includes an amendment submitted by Senator Wyden
- Other Senators will also look to submit various parts of legislation that came out of SJC as individual amendments
- Currently there is no agreement in place on whether roll call votes on those amendments will be subject to super majority or simple majority
- Senator Reid is on record saying he will not facilitate any agreement wrt to Super Majority. From the floor today:
As I have said before, if there are senators who don’t like these amendments and think they should be subjected to 60-vote thresholds, these senators are going to have to engage in an old-fashioned filibuster. These amendments are by and large germane, and I believe they should be adopted if a majority of the Senate supports them- Again that remark from this am is directed towards Republican Senators.
- At any point during the debate Senator McConnell may file cloture to cut off debate on the entire bill
Enjoy.
I just wish somebody could explain why the Dems can’t just refuse to pass any FISA bill at all if it contains immunity. We can get along just fine without one.
Because Reid has decided to bring this vote up in a way that ensure that a mere majority can kill the Judiciary Bill, but it takes 60 votes to kill the Intelligence version that has immunity. And because (probably) most Democrats would prefer to grant immunity than let the law lapse.
In other words, because the Democrats are caving.
I hate them all. Anyone that goes along with this gets my undying enmity. I’ll show up at their funerals 60 years from now just to piss on their corpses.
what? No crucifixion?
That’s the thing: there will be no crucifixion, so abusing their corpses is about all we have.
My man Dodd is at it and he rocks. Looks so presidential. Crap that makes me depressed.
Dodd is the man of the hour – no, the DAY. He’s on my TeeVee and I suspect he’ll be there for a good portion of the day. I hope he’s got his bladder and stuff under control. He could be there for a long time when the filibuster gets underway..
If this gets into full-blown fillibuster mode:
If anyone has Senators in support of his actions, encourage them to go and ask questions, without asking him to yield the floor, just yield for questions. Then ask long drawn out questions, encouraging him to sit for the question and perhaps have a drink of water while they ask it.
I can hear the money clanging in Saxby Chambliss’ pockets.
Effing tool.
I’m sure only to be surpassed by Kit Bond.
Gah.
OrrinHatch2000.com is praising Rockefeller.
Yeah, just heard that. Condescending little prick.
I can’t take any more. They’ve driven me back to my work.
Asshats.
Oh, great, Orifice has a chart. That’s it. I’m done.
Rage on, good people.
listened to VP Cheney’s speech at the Heritage Foundation and came to the conclusion the Bush Administration is or was spying on everday Americans. Because, I would support protection for the big telecoms from being sued by “terrorist” or persons convicted of terrorism. However, Cheney wants blanket coverage which is only reasonable if the big telecoms were assisting the government on spying on the average American without a warrant.
Bingo.
A DUH moment: Sooo, when we have a telecom disconnecting a wiretap service because of an unpaid invoice, just what kind of a fee (or a discount therein) would your average All American telecom charge for data mining? Since I’m assuming these are no-bid contracts, and just like isolation pay there must be a premium for the added risk, (although I’m sure they were assured that GW had it under control) I just wonder how such a contract of complicit agreement that no one wants advertised, gets to the point where they cut off the govt? Just muttering.
I am not ashamed to admit I have a man-crush on Feingold. It’s my fervent hope that after a Democrat is elected President this year, they’ll be smart enough to appoint him to the next SCOTUS opening.
Me too. Big time man-crush on Feingold… always have. When he speaks, I perk up and listen. The whole Supreme Court idea is an excellent one. Never thought of that before. I’d love to read his opinions.
Feingold’s my senator now, not as good as Wellstone was when I lived in MN … but still puts up a good fight.
I get the sense that this isn’t just politics, that some of the Senators are more fearful of this FISA vote than is really warranted.
Not to get all black helicopter here, but does the intelligence community have sh*t on some of these Senators?
No black helecopters or tinfoil hats required…
Of course they do. This program was put into place in Feb 2001, 7 months before 9/11 and just days after Cheney took office. It always has been about collecting data on political opponents and that is why we can’t allow telecom immunity. Anything else can be changed in the future, but once immunity is granted, it can’t be taken back. Right now, the only way we’re gonna get any facts out of any kind of investigation is through the discovery process in civil lawsuits against the telcos. Everything else will always be “classified.”
But yes, this has never been about “terrorist surveillance,” but about “political opponent surveillance.”
passing a FISA bill with whatever crap Bush wants with a 12 month horizon.
The Dems would then have the whip hand.
give them immunity? That’s an obstruction of justice under the cover of law.
When does the statute of limitations run out?
you can’t repeal immunity.
Once it’s granted, it’s good going forward?
of course.