This is only a Preview!

You must Publish this diary to make this visible to the public,
or click 'Edit Diary' to make further changes first.

Posting a Diary Entry

Daily Kos welcomes blog articles from readers, known as diaries. The Intro section to a diary should be about three paragraphs long, and is required. The body section is optional, as is the poll, which can have 1 to 15 choices. Descriptive tags are also required to help others find your diary by subject; please don't use "cute" tags.

When you're ready, scroll down below the tags and click Save & Preview. You can edit your diary after it's published by clicking Edit Diary. Polls cannot be edited once they are published.

If this is your first time creating a Diary since the Ajax upgrade, before you enter any text below, please press Ctrl-F5 and then hold down the Shift Key and press your browser's Reload button to refresh its cache with the new script files.


  1. One diary daily maximum.
  2. Substantive diaries only. If you don't have at least three solid, original paragraphs, you should probably post a comment in an Open Thread.
  3. No repetitive diaries. Take a moment to ensure your topic hasn't been blogged (you can search for Stories and Diaries that already cover this topic), though fresh original analysis is always welcome.
  4. Use the "Body" textbox if your diary entry is longer than three paragraphs.
  5. Any images in your posts must be hosted by an approved image hosting service (one of: imageshack.us, photobucket.com, flickr.com, smugmug.com, allyoucanupload.com, picturetrail.com, mac.com, webshots.com, editgrid.com).
  6. Copying and pasting entire copyrighted works is prohibited. If you do quote something, keep it brief, always provide a link to the original source, and use the <blockquote> tags to clearly identify the quoted material. Violating this rule is grounds for immediate banning.
  7. Be civil. Do not "call out" other users by name in diary titles. Do not use profanity in diary titles. Don't write diaries whose main purpose is to deliberately inflame.
For the complete list of DailyKos diary guidelines, please click here.

Please begin with an informative title:

Democrats speaking today in favor of the FISA bill keep coming back to the "exclusivity" provisions in the bill:

Except as provided in subsection (b), the procedures of chapters 119, 121, and 206 of title 18, United States Code, and this Act shall be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance and the interception of domestic wire, oral, or electronic communications may be conducted.

Only an express statutory authorization for electronic surveillance or the interception of domestic wire, oral, or electronic communications, other than as an amendment to this Act or chapters 119, 121, or 206 of title 18, United Staes Code, shall constitute an additional exclusive means for the purpose of subsection (a).

These speakers are adamant that these provisions mean no president will ever be able to ignore the established surveillance laws ever again.

So here's the question: What if someone does, anyway?

Here's the "exclusivity" provision of the old FISA law, still on the books when George W. Bush instituted his illegal programs:

[P]rocedures in this chapter or chapter 121 and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 shall be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance, as defined in section 101 of such Act, and the interception of domestic wire, oral, and electronic communications may be conducted.
The "administration's" lawyers -- people like John Yoo -- advised Bush that the president had the "inherent power" to ignore the FISA provisions in the name of "national security." So he did it. Despite the existence of the exclusivity provisions.

Now, we've got a new exclusivity provision that also purports to prevent the president from simply ignoring the law.

But is there really a way to write a law in a way that prevents someone from ignoring it? Of course not. If you ignore the law, you ignore the provisions preventing you from ignoring it. That, it turns out, is actually what "ignoring" means.

Now, there are ways to write laws so that there are penalties outlined for ignoring them. But this bill doesn't do that. And I'm sure that's just fine, since really no one could foresee a president ignoring surveillance laws, right?

No, there's no way to prevent a president who's willing to believe he's got the "inherent power" to ignore the law from doing so. There's only the opportunity to enforce that law against such a president. The "checks and balances" we all learned about in school.

Unfortunately, we all know that particular check has bounced for insufficient funds votes.

If there's one thing the 110th Congress has taught us, it's that this bill can only be the "exclusive means by which electronic surveillance and the interception of domestic wire, oral, or electronic communications may be conducted" to the extent that the Congress itself insists it is.

Insists. Using all their powers. Every time. All the time. Forever.

How much you wanna bet?

UPDATE: And Hoyer closes his speech with the same ridiculous argument. What a capper.

UPDATE 2: The House Majority opposes the bill by a margin of 105-128. The bill passes.

UPDATE 3: And the great payoff for this week's "bipartisan compromises?" Republican one minute speeches blaming Democrats for high gas prices.


You must enter an Intro for your Diary Entry between 300 and 1150 characters long (that's approximately 50-175 words without any html or formatting markup).

Extended (Optional)

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 09:06 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.