GovernmentExecutive.com

The head of the nation's most prominent civil-liberties group vowed Monday to make sure that a bill to embolden a domestic wiretapping program authorized by President Bush "stays dead" when the new Congress comes to Washington in January.

The House last month passed a bill, H.R. 5825, to overhaul rules for wiretaps without warrants. The Senate companion measure, S. 2453, did not get a floor vote before lawmakers recessed for the mid-term election. Civil libertarians do not think the legislation has strong enough privacy protections.

American Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Anthony Romero said his group will pressure the 110th Congress to "accept responsibility for their oversight of the executive branch" and an "arrogant and unresponsive administration."

Romero spoke to more than 1,500 ACLU members who came to Washington this week for the organization's national conference. Following a full day of speakers, state delegations are scheduled to lobby on Capitol Hill on Tuesday.

In the years since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Romero's group has pushed consistently for proper checks and balances on government power. The ACLU is the "first responder in the defense of the First Amendment" and the "first line in the defense of the Constitution," he said. "We went to court, went to Congress and went the distance."

In his keynote, Romero largely slammed the president and Republican leadership in Congress but said Democrats share the blame. Their "reticence, timidity and complicity enabled the Bush administration to damage our core American values," he said.

The eavesdropping bills' fate in the short, post-election session that is set to begin next month hinges on whether Republicans lose their leadership in either chamber, ACLU Washington Office Director Caroline Fredrickson said in an interview. "If Democrats take control, they won't let a bad spying bill get jammed through," she said.

If the GOP stays in power, portions of the spying measure could be attached to any number of vehicles, including must-pass appropriations bills, Fredrickson warned. The surveillance bills are unlikely to win approval through the standard process for reconciling tax and spending measures, she said.

Surveillance legislation is one of the main topics that ACLU members will take to the Hill on Tuesday. Almost 250 meetings have been planned with congressional offices.

"These are highly informed, committed voters and activists," Fredrickson said. "They're going to take that to their members of Congress and let them know what they think."

The conference opened Sunday with panels featuring Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, ACLU President Nadine Strossen, MSNBC political commentator Tucker Carlson and Air America Radio host Rachel Maddow.

Democratic strategist Donna Brazile, Nixon-era White House counsel John Dean, former Navy general counsel Alberto Mora and retired U.S. Ambassador Joe Wilson also were scheduled to speak at the summit.

COMMENTS

• Unlike some civilians, I wouldn’t think of telling my CG how to deploy his troops, just as I could not presume to critique our law enforcement officers safeguarding our country. My hat is always off for our men (and women) in the blue and green. Education may teach you theory, but only experience can teach you how to survive and operate on the streets of America or Iraq. My training and experience is in computers, business systems, and security. We teach the creation, use and manipulation, and access control of databases; worldwide information dissemination via the Internet, wired and wireless technology; and the fact that if a signal is in the air or a wire is out of site that the enemy is listening. Meanwhile, across the street my coworkers are teaching folks precisely how to intercept that information and to watch people from 500 miles up. To see such an example go to www.terraserver.com, enter your address, and look at your house. Yes, perhaps I’m a tad paranoid, but even I admit that only the Chinese could truly monitor us, having enough people to go one-on-one. My concern is not for the immediate future or the intent of our fine officers, military or law enforcement. And I’ll even admit that data mining can be a valuable tool for our protectors, not just big business. But I’ve read Jules Verne’s “Twenty Thousand Leagues Beneath the Sea,” watched “Star Trek,” and know the evolutionary rate of our technology. What was once thought fantasy now exists. I’ve researched the technology of and read the reasons for the proposed deployment of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chip technology; and know that business does want to put those chips in my shorts. But realistically, my true concern is for the constitution, the law, pending legislation, and legal precedent. I still do not know what is more important, security or freedom; but smarter people than I have said, “Without freedom, we have no security.” Has our government ever abused surveillance? Remember Watergate? McCarthy and the Black List? The Japanese-American internments of WWII? My paranoid sounding cries of “beware” are meant only to make people aware, think, and discuss. Thank you, evidently they are working. Tip off (and still out there) GovExec.com reader Posted November 3, 2006 9:20 AM
• I've tried to set everyone straight on what is really going on, but I see I've made no impression on the paranoid conspiracy types out there who accept everything that the ACLU says as gospel. Obviously, nothing I say will convince you otherwise, so I'll just wish you a pleasant day, and say good bye. Before I go, think about this -- do you personally know anyone whose rights have been violated by the passage of the Patriot Act, or the interception of phone conversations between people in the United States and suspected terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.? I didn't think so. GovExec.com reader Posted November 2, 2006 3:54 PM
• Dearest Tip Off Wannabe, Yeah, that's the ticket, trot out the usual suspects from Hollywood and accuse anyone in your way of being some kind of nut. If you security types had your way, we'd all be branded, would turn our checks over to you and only be allowed to speak if spoken to! Re-education camps would dot the countryside and we'd all need "papers" to travel from town to town! See, ain't this neat? But I'm only kidding. Oh, by-the-way, you forgot the obligatory fear-mongering to help support your position. Isn't that working anymore? Cracked & Wired Posted November 2, 2006 10:28 AM