Today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed draft legislation that, if it also passes the Senate and is signed by the President, will grant retroactive immunity to telecommunication companies that knowingly broke the law by spying on millions of Americans without proper authorization -- House Passes Bill on Wiretap Powers. Personally, I strongly (!) disagree with granting retroactive immunity for companies that knowingly broke the law, especially when that retroactive immunity was bought and paid for with substantial campaign donations to a few key lawmakers.
Full disclosure: I am a big fan of the Obama candidacy. But how can he not have a clear position on one of the major political fights that has been brewing for months? By winning the primaries, Obama has become the de facto leader of the Democratic party -- by remaining silent, Obama is, in effect, supporting retroactive immunity for the telecommunication companies. Indeed, if Obama was serious about opposing it, he could have had a little chat with Nancy Pelosi, and he could still discuss this with Harry Reid, thereby preventing the cynical sale of retroactive get-out-of-jail-free cards.
I am not saying that Obama is under any legal or ethical obligation to do that. But at a minimum, a presidential candidate that asks us to believe in "change," and who said that "I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over", cannot remain silent and should have the guts to take a firm position on this. Not next month; not next week; now.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
Ask and thou shalt receive -- http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/obama_backing_fisa_compromise.php
It looks like he's backing the law, but there's a caveat hidden in there:
"It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses."
Let's wait and see before passing judgment.
Hmm... and then there's this very disturbing post from Jack Balkin over at balkinization --
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2008/06/why-obama-kinda
-likes-fisa-bill-but-he.html
The gist of it is that there are 2 parts to the FISA bill: erosion of civil liberties and retroactive immunity. Balkin convincingly argues that Obama quite likes the erosion of civil liberties because he will be the next President and will likely want to use the additional power. And although he meekly objects to retroactive immunity, he only does so because his base is so virulently opposed to it.
Some of you know that this kind of reasoning was exactly why I did not want Hillary to be the candidate. Sadly, Balkin may be right that the power fever has already taken hold of Obama too.
Post a Comment