After a long battle, the Senate passed an update of the nation's spying laws. However, the House has passed a slightly different Bill. The Senate's version allows immunities to the telecommunication companies for their previous eavesdropping on customers, the House's version doesn't. This immunity issue arises as a result of over 40 lawsuits that have been filed against the telecommunication companies. The Senate rejected a bill that would have let the lawsuits go forward with the government as the defendant instead of the telecommunication companies.
Personally, I think this is a good move on the side of the government (not the Senate part). After all, they asked the telecommunication companies to invade people's privacy, they should be the ones to take the responsibility, not the companies that helped them. Of course, there's the argument that they should have disobeyed the order, but realistically, what company is going to ignore an order from the government? I don't see the telecommunication companies as having done anything terribly wrong, and I hope they can either get the immunities clause passed, or the defendant changed to the government.
What are your opinions?
FISA Bill Article
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
If I'm not mistaken, Bush also told the Senate that if the Senate makes an extension on the current policy (making it last another week or so) in order to allow some more time to come up with a new plan, he would veto the plan. But, then he's risking having no new FISA bill as all. So, why would he make the risk and rush the policy makers? It just makes sense that if both Houses can't come up with a compromise right away, you don’t want to rush them. So why is he pushing so hard to have a new plan by Saturday (or whenever the current FISA bille expires), when the bill expires? If I were him, I would want the Senate to spend time on a new bill, not rush to get it done.
Post a Comment