[southnews] US Congress closes  its doors for Spying Bill
 
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:27:32 -0500 (CDT)


House doors were locked Thursday night as lawmakers prepared for their 
first closed session in 25 years to debate surveillance legislation.

Republicans requested privacy for what they termed "an honest debate" on 
the new Democratic eavesdropping bill that is opposed by the White House 
and most Republicans in Congress.

The private session was scheduled for nighttime so the House chamber 
could be swept by security personnel to make sure there were no 
listening or recording devices.

The last such session in the House was in 1983 on U.S. support for 
paramilitary operations in Nicaragua. Only five closed sessions have 
taken place in the House since 1825.

The Secret Is Out: There Was No Big Secret

By Dana Milbank
Washington Post, United States Friday, March 14, 2008; A02

Psst. Congress has a secret.

At 6 p.m. yesterday, the House of Representatives -- the People's House, 
as lawmakers like to call it -- turned itself into a private club, 
determined to shield its deliberations from the prying eyes of the 
American public.

"I ask unanimous consent," said Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (Md.), that 
"the House resolve itself into secret session."

Shhh!

"I will bring information . . . to the secret session that some members 
are aware of but others are not," promised a coy Minority Whip Roy Blunt 
(Mo.), declaring it his solemn "obligation to bring information and 
communicate information that is confidential and that I believe ought to 
be kept secret."

Hush, hush!

Rep. Dan Lundgren (R-Calif.) was giddy at the prospect. "That which is 
discussed in the secret session cannot be revealed even if it is of a 
non-classified nature," he announced on the House floor.

Speak of this to no one!

They sounded like schoolgirls whispering among themselves in class. 
Except they weren't schoolgirls: They were members of Congress, debating 
whether to grant immunity to telecom companies that cooperate in a 
clandestine government eavesdropping program. A vote on that program, a 
rewriting of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, will come today. 
Last night was the time for an hour-long secret debate about the spy 
bill -- preceded by a 90-minute public debate about whether to have the 
secret debate.

It was the pinnacle of a day of pointlessness on both sides of the 
Capitol. In the Senate, Vice President Cheney rushed to Capitol Hill to 
cast a tiebreaking procedural vote -- only for his side to lose in the 
substantive vote that followed. Senate Democrats, meanwhile, held an 
all-day voting marathon on provisions of a budget bill that it will 
proceed to ignore even before the ink is dry. Then, of course, there was 
Sen. Wayne Allard (R-Colo.), who introduced a frivolous bill seeking 
$1.4 trillion to fund all of Sen. Barack Obama's presidential-campaign 
proposals. "Hey, Allard, you working this hard?" Obama called out before 
joining his colleagues in voting down the plan, 97 to 0.

The scheme to bring the House into secret session last night was every 
bit as frivolous, but Democratic leaders went along with it in hopes of 
avoiding a noisy distraction. "My view is just act like Jell-O," Rep. 
Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), the Democratic caucus chairman, said as he entered 
the chamber.

Hoyer, while the one announcing the session, made it clear that it 
wasn't his idea. "The minority whip came to me indicating that there are 
things that he thought the members ought to have knowledge of that he 
was of the opinion could not be divulged in public debate," he explained 
on the House floor. "We did not want to be, nor are we, in the position 
of saying to the minority whip, if he has such information, that we want 
to preclude that from being offered."

Blunt felt empowered by his Big Secret; it showed how very important he 
is. "Because of my clearance level, I've seen the secret information and 
information at other levels as well," he bragged. He told his peers that 
once he tells them his secrets, "you can't discuss them as having been 
discussed as part of this secret session."

Complicating the Republicans' secret plans, and the Democrats' 
capitulation, were a dozen liberal members who raised a series of 
procedural objections.

"There are some of us here who feel that this country has drifted toward 
a version of a national security state," said Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio).

Blunt pursed his lips and stroked his chin.

"Since 1825, three times in the history of this country and at no time 
since 1983 have we done what you are proposing," pointed out Rep. Lloyd 
Doggett (D-Tex.). It's true: Last night's session was the fifth since 
1812, in fact.

Lundgren, hobbling into the chamber with a crutch because of an injured 
foot, sought permission to speak. "I was here for the last three secret 
sessions we had," he boasted.

"I was here for the secret sessions," countered Rep. David Obey 
(D-Wis.). "And given the mumbo jumbo that I heard," he added, the main 
purpose was "to demonstrate the total uselessness of secret sessions."

Laughter filled the chamber.

But the left-wingers were unwilling to take the secrecy lightly. "It's a 
very, very serious matter when we do the public's business in secret," 
Doggett said. In the front row, Reps. Marcy Kaptur (Ohio) and Diane 
Watson (Calif.) applauded.

Hoyer began to look tired. Blunt allowed himself a grin at his 
counterpart's difficulty in controlling his party. "The information we 
bring to the floor will not be confusing to the members but enlightening 
to the members, and that's why I propose that we'll move for a secret 
session," he explained evenly.

The howls from Democrats continued. "Scare tactics! . . . Ominous! . . . 
I object!"

"I've got to go back to my district and explain to my constituents why 
we had a secret session," protested Watson.

"I think it would be harder to explain to your constituents why we 
didn't have a secret session," answered Blunt.

The last of the liberals, Rep. David Scott (Ga.), got swept away by 
Greek mythology. "Is this a political ploy?" he demanded. "Is this a 
Trojan horse?"

An exasperated Hoyer sat down. Blunt finally had mercy on his 
counterpart, and offered some soothing words.

"I have not suggested this is at the top-secret level," he said.

The secret was out! The man who requested the secret session in the 
first place finally admitted he had no big secrets to divulge.

On the other hand, the 90-minute debate over the secret session did 
serve a purpose. It proved that the only thing worse than a secret 
session of the House is a session it holds in public.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031304435_pf.html