Some days, it's just about impossible to get out the door and off to places where we're supposed to be. However, the push by an outside interest group to whip up an ill-informed and fear-driven froth in the First about FISA demands our attention on this lovely, sunny day when we'd rather be out and about.
Even more than his war funding votes, Walz received scathing (and in our view justified) criticism of his vote for the PAA and his defense of it back in August. Local papers, national security experts, and the netroots together scolded him for his vote and explanation. We heard him tell a public meeting that he got more calls about FISA than he did the birth of his son, Gus, about three weeks before Election Day, 2006.
Update: Walz's response--as Archer Dem has noted in the comments--has prompted Matt Stoller at Open Left to ask, Should We Remove Tim Walz from the Bush Dog List?. Interesting answers in the comments section. Stoller ends up answering no, but his rejection of his own idea is based on Walz's vote not to extend the current bill. Stoller doesn't examine Walz's explanation of his "No" vote (which is noted below in the February 13, 2007 news release so we wonder why Stoller missed it the first time); rather, he assumes that it was to favor the Republican position--presumably, the A-list blogger will get out the pitchforks for Kucinich on his no vote, too.[end update].
A later vote, less noted by his critics, was the one he cast for the RESTORE Act in November; the RESTORE Act was the House's attempt to fix the objectionable parts of PAA. The differences between the RESTORE Act and the Senate spying bill are at the core of the present hostilities.
Some national bloggers have been doing the heavy lifting in the battle. We recommend the EFF's Deeplinks, the ACLU's work here, Firedoglake's Empty Wheel and this video at Crooks and Liars. On the right, there's an attempt to spin this into an anti-trial lawyer talking point. There's a bogeyman under every bed for these folks.
Now Congressman Walz has issued a statement about the issue ad:
"This ad is reckless with our national security. Implying that America's surveillance against terrorists is crippled is a lie. What's worse, this group has encouraged terrorists to think our country's surveillance system is weak, when nothing could be further from the truth. Why on earth would any group go on television and claim that America's intelligence agencies can't do their job?"
As a result of recent court rulings, special-interest lobbying groups like this one now have the ability to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money to say whatever they want through paid advertising to advance their political agenda. "
This lobbying group's so-called 'issue ad' is a new low," added Walz. "Citizens in southern Minnesota aren't fooled by this fear-mongering but they do deserve to know who is behind this shadowy organization and where they are from."
Prior to this Congressional recess, Walz urged the President and Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle to stay in Washington and reach an agreement to permanently modernize the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), properly balancing the government's intelligence gathering needs with safeguarding the very liberties that millions of Americans have fought and died for.
"As a 24 year veteran of the National Guard, I understand better than this group that this is a dangerous world," concluded Walz. "My message to those terrorists who seek to do our country harm is: We still have the tools in place to intercept and disrupt what you may be planning --and we can act lightning fast -- because there is no disagreement in our country about protecting the America people."
The following FACT CHECK: The Truth about the Reckless “Defense of Democracies” TV Ad accompanied the statement. See some of our other posts on the ad from the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies/Defense of Democracy here, here and here.
Reckless claims made in the ad… |
The Truth |
|
“Midnight. February 16th. The law that lets intelligence agencies intercept Al-Qaeda communications . . . expires.” |
1. The extension, called the Protect America Act expired, leaving the original 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act still intact. [Letter from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes to President Bush, 2.14.08] 2. Additionally, authority granted under the Protect America Act continues for an additional year to ensure Americans are well-protected. [Reyes, 2.14.08] |
|
“Senate Democrats and Republicans vote overwhelmingly to extend terrorist surveillance.” |
1. Months earlier, the House passed the RESTORE Act, which also extended surveillance of terrorist targets without granting retroactive immunity to lawbreaking telecom companies. [Blue Stem Prairie, 11.15.07] 2. The Senate bill provides retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies for participating in President’s illegal wiretapping efforts. [Washington Post, 2.16.08] |
|
“But the House refuses to vote and instead goes on vacation.” |
1. The House rejected an extension to the temporary Protect America Act. [Roll no. 54, 191-229] 2. The House balked at retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies and sought to work out the differences between the Senate bill and the House-passed RESTORE Act. [Washington Post, 2.16.08] 3. Walz called upon President Bush and Congressional leadership to put aside partisan differences and remain in Washington to work out a new bill. [Walz, 2.13.08] |
|
“So new surveillance against terrorists is crippled.” |
1. “Today, the National Security Agency has the authority to conduct surveillance in at least three different ways, all of which provide strong capability to monitor the communications of possible terrorists.” [Reyes, 2.14.08] |
|
“Tell Tim Walz that Congress must do its job and pass the Senate’s terrorist surveillance bill to keep us all safe.” |
1. Walz did his job by challenging his colleagues to stay in Washington and work out a long-term, bipartisan solution. [Walz, 2.13.08] 2. We have been, and continue to be protected by our nation’s intelligence gathering agencies who are using the 1978 FISA law and existing authority granted under the Protect America Act to keep us safe. [NY Times, 2.14.08] 3. Yesterday, House and Senate Democrats met to work out a compromise. Republicans and the White House refused to come to the table. [Pelosi 2.22.08] |
|
Photo of Congressman Tim Walz. Caption: “Tell Rep. Tim Walz. 507-206-0643 |
Tim's response has earned him consideration for removal from OpenLeft.com's "Bush Dog" list, somewhere he didn't belong in the first place.
http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=4123
Posted by: Archer Dem | February 23, 2008 at 02:49 PM