SubscribeVoting "yes" were 2 Democrats and 50 Republicans.
Voting "no" were 41 Democrats, 5 Republicans and one independent.
Section 203(b): Sharing wiretap information
Subsection 203(b) allows the FBI to disclose evidence obtained under Title III to federal officials, including "law enforcement, intelligence, protective, immigration, national defense [and] national security" officials. To fall within Subsection 203(b), the information must contain "foreign intelligence," "counterintelligence," or "foreign intelligence information," and its disclosure must be "appropriate to the proper performance of the official duties of the officer making or receiving the disclosure."
Prior to Subsection 203(b), existing wiretap law allowed wiretap evidence to be disclosed under certain circumstances, but did not include explicit authorization to disclose such information to federal intelligence officials.
The Justice Department reported (pdf) that it had made disclosures to the intelligence community under Subsection 203(b) two times as of July 26, 2002.
Section 203(d): Sharing foreign intelligence information
This subsection allows for the disclosure of any foreign intelligence information, counterintelligence information, or information pertaining to foreign intelligence -- however collected -- to the federal officials listed above, if no other law restricts or prohibits such disclosure. This section also provides for disclosure of threat information obtained during criminal investigations to "appropriate" federal, state, local, or foreign government officials for the purpose of responding to the threat. Such information can include threat of attack, other "grave hostile acts," sabotage, terrorism, or clandestine intelligence gathering activities.
The Department of Justice reported (pdf) that disclosure of information obtained through grand juries convened during criminal investigations concerning foreign intelligence had been made under Section 203 approximately 40 times as of July 26, 2002. The agency did not explain whether the information was foreign intelligence, counterintelligence, or information about foreign intelligence because "information in international terrorism cases tends to to qualify under all three definitions." The Justice Department also declined to say how many separate grand juries produced the information because it does not maintain that data.
a little debate-for-the-sake-of-debate isn't inherently bad, is it?A little, no. A little can be fun. Ain't nothing little about dios' trollery.
Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA): "Madam Speaker, this resolution purports to protect the symbols of Christmas, but what really needs to be protected are not the symbols of Christmas, but rather the spirit of Christmas. The spirit of Christmas demands generosity and goodwill towards others. Instead of legislation that respects the spirit of Christmas, Congress in just these past few weeks has passed a budget that includes mean-spirited attacks on the least of us. For those who are hungry, we are cutting food stamps. For those who are sick, we are cutting Medicaid. For those who are in prison, we are imposing senseless mandatory minimums. For others we are ignoring increases in heating costs and cutting student loans. At the same time we are cutting those programs to help the least of us, we are cutting taxes for the wealthiest in society. Madam Speaker, we ought to express our passion for Christmas through deeds, not words; and we should not be distracted from our responsibility to uphold the spirit of Christmas as we consider the effects our actions on the Federal budget will have on the least of us during this holiday season. For these reasons I oppose this resolution."
if it didn't have that unfortunate name
« Older "To avoide the tediouse repetition of these woorde... | Wal-Mart sells... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by ScottMorris at 10:58 AM on December 16, 2005