House to Vote on FISA Eavesdropping Bill

Against the backdrop of a presidential veto threat, the House readied a vote on an eavesdropping bill that would expand court oversight of government electronic surveillance in the United States.

The bill, which was scheduled for a vote Wednesday, allows unfettered surveillance of foreign targets but requires special authorization if the foreign targets are likely to be in contact with people inside the United States — an effort to safeguard Americans' privacy.

Critics of the bill say the authorization, commonly referred to as a "blanket warrant," will tie up intelligence agents in red tape, impeding them from conducting urgent surveillance of terrorist suspects.

The White House threatened again on Tuesday to veto the measure unless substantive changes are made.

President Bush's central objection is the bill's lack of retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that allegedly violated wiretapping and intelligence laws by secretly providing the government access to Americans' e-mails and phone records without court orders.


Telecommunications companies face roughly 40 lawsuits in U.S. civil courts for their alleged cooperation with government surveillance of Americans without the appropriate court orders. The Bush administration warns that without immunity, if the companies are found guilty they could be bankrupted by the penalties.

The Senate's version of the surveillance bill is expected to be unveiled on Thursday. The Senate bill is not finalized but is more likely to include an immunity provision, according to a person close to the process who demanded anonymity because the measure wasn't final.



That law was last changed in August, after the administration argued technological advances had made the old law too cumbersome and created a dire gap in its intelligence collection. The updated law allowed the government to eavesdrop without a court order on communications conducted by a person reasonably believed to be outside the U.S., even if an American is on one end of the conversation — so long as that American is not the intended focus or target of the surveillance.

Civil liberties advocates and Congress' Democratic leaders have argued the new law, which expires in January, doesn't adequately protect Americans' privacy.