FISA Amendments Act of 2008

FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008 -- (House of Representatives - March 14, 2008)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SESTAK. Mr. Speaker, I was assigned to the Pentagon the day 9/11 happened. It was very obvious, sitting there at dead center, that the world had changed. We in the military used to like away games. We liked our wars over there. Suddenly we had a home game and things had to change.

A few days later, I was appointed to be head of the Navy's antiterrorism unit. Shortly after that, I was on the ground in Afghanistan flying in with a fellow from the CIA with a suitcase filled with millions of dollars. I wanted the best insurance, the best intelligence. But I felt I always had that because I had worked at the National Security Council, where in counterproliferation and antiterrorism efforts there, I was able to see that whether it had been President Reagan, President Clinton, or the first President Bush, FISA provided that ability.

I like this bill. It is very similar to the Senate bill. If someone in Saudi Arabia is talking to someone in Germany and it routes to the United States, we can listen in without asking questions.

I remember being in the White House and being frustrated, because if somebody was doing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, we couldn't, under FISA, get a warrant for them. This bill fixes that.

And then I step back in emergencies. This bill fixes it in an emergency situation that you don't even have to ask permission; you can just do it. And it extends from 3 days of having to come to the court till 7 days. And then even if the court takes another 30 days, keep listening. Thank you for that.

But the real differences come down to what I think is important, because every day I was out there for 31 years in the military, I wasn't just fighting an enemy or trying to deter him; I was fighting for an ideal, the ideal of which America is founded upon, the rights of civil rights. Therefore, I honestly believe what we have done in the telecommunications companies and discussing immunity should be done by the proper branch of government, the judicial branch, a court, the FISA Court. Then if everything was not awry, then we can say, under the provisions of the previous law, they have immunity.

And then I would like to also point out that it is very important to me that we have oversight on reports that are coming, and they must come to the FISA Court to explain the procedures they will follow. That type of oversight is what I followed for. In short, I will never forget being over there in charge of my carrier battle group, fighting in Afghanistan, that what I was fighting for was security, number one, properly balanced with civil rights. This bill

[Page: H1710]

does do that. I wouldn't vote for it any other way unless it did.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source