February 1, 2008 8:58 AM

What Should We Think About the FISA Amendments Agreement?

I'm waiting for a response from Dodd's Senate office about whether or not he could or would filibuster final passage of the SSCI bill, if it were to contain retroactive immunity. Contrary to what has been reported, getting a vote on the Dodd/Feingold amendment has never been a substitute for a filibuster. As a germane amendment to the underlying bill, Dodd/Feingold always deserved a straight majority vote. Going back to December, the expectation had been that Dodd filibuster after his amendment to strip retroactive immunity failed.

Also, I think this piece by Paul Kiel gets what this agreement means wrong. Agreeing to unanimous consent on which amendments get votes does not necessarily constitute agreeing not to filibuster. I don't know how setting time limits for debate on certain amendments impacts whether a filibuster is possible or when in the process it would be able to take place.

It's not that the GOP caved (to some extent they did) and the Dems didn't. Caving just isn't the right term for the process from an outcome standpoint. This particular round of negotiations is just that - a round of negotiations on process. The process is rigged because the SSCI remains the underlying bill. This has not changed and getting a raft of amendments to improve the bill is no real achievement. All the good amendments would have to pass to make the SSCI bill look like the SJC bill or the House RESTORE bill. And all of the amendments are not going to pass, so we're still likely going to be stuck with retroactive immunity and expansive government surveillance powers in legislation coming from a Democratic-controlled Senate.

This slate of amendments is going to serve as a fig leaf to cover the Democratic caucus in the event that a still-bad SSCI bill is passed with some Democratic support. Democrats offered amendments, the amendments got votes, the votes failed. But in the end, it has to come back to the underlying bill.

Glenn Greenwald and Christy Hardin Smith have pointed this out already and I'm sure Tim Tagaris is thinking the same thing.

That said, we will have a very clear target on retroactive immunity: the Dodd/Feingold amendment getting 51 votes. The surest way to make a filibuster unnecessary would be to win on this amendment. Take action now through CREDO Action's email tool!

***

Matt Browner Hamlin helped lead the fight against telecom immunity as part of Senator Chris Dodd's presidential campaign. He has joined the CREDO Mobile team to stop the Bush administration's illegal wiretapping program and hold the telecom companies accountable for their lawbreaking.