Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad

[declan@well.com (Declan McCullagh)]

Stop the presses -- the other shoe didn't drop. Despite a flurry of
last-minute hyperbole, the House passed an anti-terrorism bill this
afternoon without the ominous encryption or wiretap provisions. Now
the bill lies in the lap of the Senate, which probably will approve it
later today or tomorrow before they leave town for the August recess.

In the wake of the dual bombings, Congress wanted to be seen as taking
*some* action before they adjourned, and last weekend Clinton and the
Dems started lobbying hard for the heinous measures they wanted in an
anti-terrorism bill. Vastly expanded state-snooping capabilities:
multipoint wiretaps, warrantless short-term wiretaps, dialed-phone
number recorders, and black and smokeless powder taggants. Even
possible of anti-crypto language that Jamie Gorelick, deputy attorney
general, has been shopping around for months.

The Net owes its thanks to the House Republicans for stopping these
fool Dems in a fine backroom political maneuver late last night.

They did it through the House Rules Committee, which in the wee hours
of the morning reported a rule allowing the GOP leadership to introduce
the terrorism bill on the floor today -- without letting Democrats see
it, amend it, or even send it back to committee. It was a good plan --
coordinated by Rep. Chris Cox -- keeping the legislation away from the
hands of the Big Brother Dems.

The Democrats waxed pissy. Rep. David Bonior, the party's whip, called
the majority's maneuvering "extrordinary." John Conyers, the ranking
Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, blasted Gingrich and the
Republican leadership for "bringing a meaningless bill to the House
floor."

Conyers said to reporters at 1 pm: "It's a hoax on the American
people. It is all bark and no bite... This bill is missing the
important wiretapping provisions that would allow law enforcement to
find and stop terrorists before they kill. The House Republicans and
the NRA say we should not have emergency authority for surveillance
even if we know terrorists are about to blow a plane out of the sky.
They also say that we should not have wiretap authority for terrorists who
use more than one telephone to make their deadly plans."

Of course, this is political grandstanding at its finest -- or worst.
Conyers conveniently neglected to add that law enforcement officers
already have the right to use roving wiretaps with court approval.

Also, there was a mixup over Digital Telephony funding, compounded by
the text of the legislation's being kept secret until the last minute.
Summaries distributed to reporters early this afternoon said: "The bill
authorizes the FBI to use enhanced telephone technology to investigate
suspected terrorist activity. Funding for equipment purchase was
provided in the 1996 omnibus appropriations measure enacted earlier
this year." But the DT provisions weren't in the final draft of the bill.

Silly Congressperns. The House had *already* approved the DT slushfund
on July 24 as part of the 1997 Commerce, Justice, State departments
appropriations bill.

Now the 1997 CJS appropriations bill goes to the Senate, which will
decide how much cash to give Digital Telephony when they return in early
September.

What's going to happen? Well, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), a former
prosecutor and longtime proponent of Digital Telephony, said yesterday
at the Intelligence Committee hearing on terrorism: "I was proud to
have worked with the FBI director to ensure passage of the
Communications Assisatance for Law Enforcement Act, sometimes called
the digital telephony law."

With Republicans like the ones in the House, who needs so-called "civil
libertarian" Democrats?

-Declan