Events Calendar
In This Section
Most Read Stories
Family found dead in Ohio home
Man gets 3 years in prison for having sex with horse
Robbers order bar patrons to empty pockets
Sex-toy study at Duke University raises some eyebrows
Akron man turns himself in after authorities turn up heat
Man appears alive at own funeral
Take comfort in knowing Browns could be bigger losers
Blogs:
Pets:
Not 101 Dalmations…but close!
The Heldenfiles:
Friday Notebook
Patrick McManamon:
For your perusal
Akron Zips:
No. 1 UA soccer remains perfect, Zips football defeats rival Flashes
Tribe Matters:
Tribe makes roster moves
Cleveland Browns:
Lewis doesn't like boycott
Kent State Sports:
Kent State falls to Akron, 20-28
Cleveland Cavaliers:
Gameblog: Cavs at Knicks
Buckeye Blogging:
Weekly ‘B’ Deck Report – New Mexico St.
Varsity Letters:
Wrestling, bowling teams prepare for season
All Da King's Men:
If It Looks Like Islamic Terrorism…
Blog of Mass Destruction:
Dems Message To Women: Don't Enjoy The Sex
Akron Law Café:
Health Care Financing Reform: (62) The Stupak Amendment
See Jane Style:
Muffle Your Muffler
Car Chase:
Perfect Weather for an Autumn Drive
Let's Talk Real Estate:
RUMORS: Downtown Restaurant Explosion
Ohio Travels with Betty:
Jack is looking for a trip to Southern Ohio the week of November 16.
Sound Check:
The Black Keys to perform benefit concert at Musica on November 27
HRLite House:
Personal Rant – Why People Do Not Live in Northeast Ohio
Akron Gamer:
New 'Call of Duty' could set entertainment record
The long argument about eavesdropping after Sept. 11 should end. The U.S. House has struck a balance between liberty and security
Published on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2008
The challenging question has been: What precise adjustments must be made? On Friday, the U.S. House approved legislation that effectively bridges differences of opinion. No surprise that the compromise features unsatisfying elements. Senators would do well to examine closely proposed flexibility for surveillance in urgent circumstances. This potential loophole may require narrowing.
On the whole, the legislation represents a marked improvement over the dangerous power grab conducted by the Bush White House. The president opted on his own to bypass secretly the legal framework for eavesdropping on the communications of Americans with suspected ties to terrorists. When word of the president acting outside the law surfaced in news accounts, a colossal legal and political argument ensued, one the compromise seeks reasonably to end.
Sen. Russell Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat, called the proposal a ''capitulation.'' The deal would strengthen the ability of intelligence officials to eavesdrop on foreign targets. It recognizes that today international communications often pass through American switches, requiring more fitting warrant procedures. In emergencies, intelligence agencies would be allowed to conduct wiretaps without court orders for a week (the worrisome loophole).
More, the compromise opens the way to immunity for telecommunications firms that cooperated with the president's off-the-shelf surveillance. The companies face roughly 40 lawsuits. That avenue to White House accountability could be closed.
What do those rightly concerned about executive overreach get in return? The immunity isn't a certainty. A federal judge would determine whether the firms received a legitimate request from the federal government directing their participation.
That essential dose of checks and balances appears elsewhere in the compromise. House Democrats won agreement that the process is the ''exclusive'' means for such surveillance, reinforcing that this president and future presidents must not circumvent the law. Inspectors general in several agencies would have authority to review the wiretapping program. The court overseeing the program must give approval of the procedures in advance.
Worth emphasis is that the court still would have to grant a warrant if an American residing in this country is a target of the investigation.
House Democrats made a political calculation. They recognize the potential for the White House and its Republican allies to play the national security card, excessively and shamelessly. That isn't the full story. Almost everyone agrees the surveillance regime needs to be revamped. This compromise represents a worthy effort to accomplish the task. It seeks a balance between liberty and security. It marks a vast improvement over the recklessness first conceived and promoted by the White House.
Get the full article here.
Comments
Click here to post your comments
