Democrats holding immunity for telecoms hostage

NY Times:

Whether telecommunication utilities should have legal immunity for having helped the National Security Agency conduct eavesdropping without warrants emerged on Tuesday as the pivotal issue in the debate over wiretapping powers.

The Bush administration, urged by the telecommunication industry, is pushing hard for Congress to include immunity for past actions in any package to protect them from a series of civil suits.

House Democrats promised on Tuesday to block any deal for immunity unless the White House agreed to turn over internal records showing the utilities’ role in the eavesdropping.

President Bush secretly approved the program weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Without the records, “to give immunity at this point in time would be a blind immunity,” the House majority leader, Steny D. Hoyer, Democrat of Maryland, told reporters.

The telecommunication industry, while keeping a low profile on its role, has mounted a vigorous campaign behind the scenes to win over Congressional supporters. The effort has considerable support among Republicans, but winning over moderate Senate Democrats may ultimately prove critical.

Telecommunication utilities have been major donors to candidates. AT&T is the second-biggest donor since 1989, contributing $38 million to candidates, including many of the lawmakers active in the eavesdropping debate, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics.

The companies, including AT&T and Verizon, face numerous federal suits by privacy advocates and others who say they participated in what amounted to illegal eavesdropping.

The administration says the suits could bankrupt the utilities, and it has tried to invoke the “state secrets” privilege to turn them back. But a judge in California rejected that, and an appellate court is expected to rule soon on the question.

If the administration and the utilities succeed in gaining retroactive immunity from Congress, that would make the suits essentially moot.

It would also forestall any possibility that any officials or the utilities could be criminally prosecuted for their roles in the program, a prospect that has worried some officials if a Democrat is elected president next year.

...

Marinate that last sentence for awhile. Democrats would consider prosecuting officials or companies who cooperated in attempting to stop terrorist attacks in this country. Is there any greater difference in the parties? Is there a better case for who favors terrorist rights and who favors stopping the terrorist? It is just totally outrageous that Democrats would even consider such a case. It is just one more example of why they should not be trusted with national security.

Meanwhile, Republicans have vowed to oppose the Democrat drafted bill. "If the Democrats reopen the critical intelligence gap we closed over the summer, Republicans will fight and win the same battle we've already fought and won on behalf of the American people," House Minority Leader John A. Boehner said.