You can't make this stuff up

I realize the majority of normal human beings probably just tune this stuff out, so the odds are you've been ignoring the incessant rhetoric over the extension of the Protect America Act.

But may I interrupt myself before I even start? Don't you love it when they give names to legislation? They even take the time to write provisions in the law that say you're not allowed to interpret the law any differently because of its title. Which I understand because what if they decided to use this act to protect Uzbekistan? Not that they ever would, of course, but I really like saying Uzbekistan. It just rolls off the tongue, doesn't it? And, in all seriousness, it'd clearly be a lot easier to sell legislation named the "Protect America Act" than, say, the "Smash your Civil Rights into Tiny Little Pieces Act." No question. But for my money, if you're going to name legislation like this, why not use something simple and popular. Like Olivia. Did you know that was the eighth most popular baby name in 2007?

Anyway, here's the deal on the Protect America Act. Since 1978, we've had something called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (not nearly as catchy as Olivia, if you ask me), which authorized a secret court to approve or reject proposed wiretaps set up by the Federal Government. Well, actually FISA allows the Government to set up the wiretap without approval, but then they have to get approval by the secret court within 72 hours. But why dwell on minutiae when it comes to tapping citizens' phones, right? The point was to protect our Constitutional freedoms while also recognizing that if the CIA had to go to a public courtroom and ask in front of an audience if it could eavesdrop on an international terrorist, the terrorist might change his phone number.

According to the Washington Post, between 1979 and 2004, the secret court approved 18,748 warrants and rejected five. And after 9/11 it became apparent to the Administration that those five who slipped through the cracks posed a major threat to our National Security. Or at least a threat to the Administration getting everything it wants. So, the President signed a secret order allowing secret eavesdropping without bothering the poor, overworked secret court judges to ask if it's OK.

Unfortunately, it's really hard to keep a secret these days, so when the public inevitably found about the President's secret order, the Administration dealt with the predictable uproar by pressuring Congress to pass the Protect America Act, which they did last August. However, because most members of Congress currently claim to be Democrats, and I suppose because they felt a little rushed back in August when the law was pushed through in five days, they made the Act good for only six months. Well, not really. Existing surveillance can continue without approval until this coming August; it's just new surveillance that has to go back to that pesky secret court. Anyway, the six months expired on February 1, but Congress passed a 15 day extension so they could work out partisan differences. That extension ran out three days ago.

Congress tried to pass another extension, but the President said flat out he wouldn't sign it. They'd had plenty of time to write the bill -- heck, he'd given them the exact wording six months ago! And with today's technology, the President's pretty darned sure it doesn't take six months to do the typesetting. So what's the delay?

Well, it turns out the delay hinges on whether the telecommunication companies who cooperated with the President's secret wiretapping plan can be sued for violating the rights of their customers (whose data they shared without an authorizing warrant). The Administration asserts that unless we give these huge corporations retroactive immunity from valid lawsuits, the Government won't be able to coerce the telecom giants to cooperate in the future without a court order. Not that they need the telecommunication companies right now, mind you, but you never know what might happen. The Senate granted the immunity in their version of the bill, but the House couldn't agree on it, so they let the Protect America Act expire and went on vacation.

The President was outraged by Congress's irresponsible behavior. "By blocking this piece of legislation, our country is more in danger of an attack," he said. And it's hard not to see his point. Just think, if Congress doesn't come to its senses soon and give that retroactive immunity to a handful of megacorporations who the Government doesn't need help from right now anyway, in six months the CIA might have to go back to asking after-the-fact permission for their wiretaps. And with only a 99.97% chance of getting that permission!

You can't make this stuff up.