Warrantless-spying debate puts Obama, Clinton in bind

A political landmine awaits Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) when the Senate takes up the hot-button issue of warrantless spying ahead of the pivotal Super Tuesday primary contests.

The Democratic presidential candidates’ votes could either give Republicans a fresh opening to attack them as weak on national security or provoke a backlash from the Democratic base.

{mosads}Staying on the campaign trail, rather than returning to Capitol Hill, is no safe haven either. Campaigning instead of legislating would likely lead to griping from both sides about the candidates’ leadership on one of the most contentious issues facing the 110th Congress.

“As close as things are in the presidential race, I think it would be in their interest to show where they stand,” said Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the American Civil Liberties Union. “If they don’t, it will certainly be remarked upon by activists.”

Attacks from the left could also fly toward Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a front-runner for the GOP nomination who has largely backed the administration on this issue. How the three candidates vote may also give a clue on whether they are starting to weigh a general-election strategy aimed at attracting more centrist voters, or are still taking positions that appeal to their respective bases active in the primaries.

At stake is Congress’s effort to overhaul the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Many liberal Democrats and civil liberties groups charge that a GOP-backed interim FISA bill passed last summer tramples on Americans’ constitutional right to privacy.

The Senate’s debate, likely to begin toward the end of next week, comes at a critical time during the nominating process. The short-term law, slammed by the left because it greatly expanded the government’s powers to conduct warrantless wiretapping, is set to expire Feb. 1. That is four days before Super Tuesday, when 22 states hold primaries that could catapult a candidate to the general election.

Obama and Clinton both voted against the White House-backed interim measure enacted in August, and they supported a Democratic alternative that would have provided more safeguards on privacy but failed to clear the Senate. McCain was not present for either of those votes.

In December, the Senate attempted to resurrect the debate. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) tried to bring a bipartisan bill to the floor that would establish new court and congressional oversight of the program, but would also grant retroactive legal immunity to the phone companies that participated in the wiretapping program after Sept. 11, 2001.

But Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, then a long-shot Democratic presidential candidate, returned from campaigning in Iowa and vowed to derail the bill because he said the retroactive immunity provision would let the Bush administration and phone companies off the hook for breaking the law. Supporters of the immunity provision argue that the companies should not be sued for working in the interest of national security, and the White House says President Bush will not sign a bill silent on the issue.

Reid was forced to pull the bill from the floor after Dodd led an effort to tie up the floor in procedural knots. While Obama and Clinton said they were supportive of Dodd’s effort, they were campaigning ahead of the Iowa caucuses, which were less than three weeks away.

During that debate, Dodd said he was “disappointed” that Obama and Clinton did not return to Capitol Hill to join his effort.

“I can’t go to a gathering of Democrats here and not have this issue come up here,” Dodd said. “This is the moment, and you ought to be here to be a part of it.”

Since Dodd objected to efforts by Reid to speed consideration of the bill in December, there is little time now for the Senate to conclude its debate and draft a bicameral compromise that Bush would be willing to sign before the Feb. 1 expiration date.

That makes it likely that Congress will have to pass at least a 30-day extension to keep the current surveillance program working. If Congress and the White House fail to reach a deal on spying legislation altogether, lawmakers may be forced to opt for a longer-term extension of the current law.

Voting to extend the current program, either in the short term or long term, would present similar risks for Obama and Clinton because such votes could be characterized as support for the controversial law. Deciding to vote against it, however, would open them up to Republican attacks.

“If Sens. Clinton and Obama were serious about national security, they’d put aside their own political ambitions and support the program,” said Alex Conant, spokesman for the Republican National Committee (RNC).

Former White House political adviser Karl Rove said during a speech Wednesday at the RNC winter meeting that voting against the program would make America more vulnerable to attacks.

 “Now, we have this issue coming up in Congress this year … it’s going to be vital to the American people to see where [Obama and Clinton] stand on this important issue,” Rove said.

An Obama aide would not say whether the senator would return to Washington for the debate or would support an extension of the current law. The aide said the senator is backing an amendment to strike the retroactive immunity language from the bill and supports “restoring oversight and accountability” to the program while ensuring there are  "vital constitutional protections.”

Spokesmen in Clinton’s campaign and Senate offices did not return several inquiries seeking comment.

Democratic activists say the presidential candidates should stand up to the fear-mongering by the Republicans, arguing that polls show that the general public strongly opposes warrantless surveillance and retroactive immunity for the telecommunications firms.

Former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.), too, will likely add pressure to his rivals Obama and Clinton, having already criticized the Democratic-led Congress for not having a “backbone” on the issue.