The Democratic Cave
Pow wow linked to this Jonathan Alter article that provides invaluable background to selise’s diary describing how the FISA amendment vote went down in the House. Here’s how selise chronicles the events of August 3:
Friday, Aug 3, 2007 (floor summary)
At 1:19 PM the House took up H.Res. 600 and it was passed (228-196) at 5:14 PMafter heated debate. In the midst of that debate, it finally emergedthat the FISA bill to be considered if made in order by passage ofH.Res. 600, would be H.R. 3356. (see congressional record pages H09663-H09675)
At 5:11 PM, Spencer Ackerman of TPM reports, "Bush Nixed Dem-DNI FISA Deal"
At 7:20 PM, John Conyers moved “to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3356).†After debate, H.R.3356 failed at 8:58 PM by a vote of 218 in favor, and 207 opposed after debate. (see congressional record pages H09685-H09695)
During the debate, Nancy Pelosi stated that:
Without any reference to the current Attorney General, and therewill be some who might question his judgment, I don’t want AlbertoGonzales to have this much power, but in a Democratic administration, Iwould not want that Attorney General to have this much power. It shouldbe a different branch of government.
So we have seen them come up with these pieces of legislation thatsubstitute the Attorney General for the FISA courts. It is just totallyunacceptable.At 8:05 PM the House Rules Committee posted a Notice of Action which included H.Res.613 Rules Committee Report #110-298 and H.Res.614 Rules Committee Report #110-299.
H.Res.613, would have, like the previous H.Res.600, allowed theSpeaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules for anunspecified FISA amendment. Passage of a FISA amendment via thisresolution would require a 2/3 vote.
H.Res.614, on the other hand, would allow a simple majority vote forconsideration of an unspecified FISA amendment on Saturday, Sunday orMonday (August 4th through the 6th). Neither of these resolutions wouldbe used.
And here’s the background Alter offers: