| |
|
-
Anti-Terrorism Bill Hits Snag on the Hill
Dispute Between Senate Democrats, White House Threatens
Committee Approval
John Lancaster Washington Post
Staff Writer
October 3, 2001; Page A6
The glow of bipartisanship faded a bit on Capitol Hill
yesterday as negotiations on an anti-terrorism bill hit a
last-minute snag and Attorney General John D. Ashcroft accused the
Democratic-controlled Senate of delaying legislation that he says
is urgently needed to thwart another terrorist attack.
One day after House negotiators reached a bipartisan
compromise on the bill, talks between Bush administration
officials and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy
(D-Vt.) stumbled on -- among other things -- a provision setting
out rules under which law enforcement agencies could share wiretap
and grand jury information with intelligence agencies.
Leahy accused the White House of reneging on an agreement
Sunday settling the last significant differences between his
committee and the administration on the final shape of the
legislation to expand police powers in surveillance and other
realms.
Ashcroft, though he did not comment directly on the
dispute, complained that the Senate was not moving with sufficient
speed given what he said was the urgent need for additional law
enforcement tools with which to fight terrorism.
"Talk won't prevent terrorism," Ashcroft said after meeting
with Leahy yesterday, adding that he was "deeply concerned about
the rather slow pace" of the legislation.
The finger-pointing marked a breach in the facade of public
unity that has governed relations between Congress and the
administration -- and Republicans and Democrats -- since the Sept.
11 terrorist attacks.
On Monday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman F. James
Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) reached agreement with Rep. John
Conyers Jr. (Mich.), the committee's ranking Democrat, on a
bipartisan compromise that incorporates many administration
proposals. Among them are measures to expand police powers to
install wiretaps, monitor Internet communications, and apprehend
and prosecute suspected terrorists.
The House negotiators rejected the most controversial
proposal, which would have permitted the indefinite jailing of
noncitizens suspected of terrorism. Under their version of the
bill, the attorney general could detain suspected terrorists for
seven days, after which they would have to be charged or released.
While emphasizing the need to safeguard civil liberties,
Leahy has also expressed his desire to get the bill done quickly.
But Senate Majority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) told
reporters that he wanted an agreement on the bill in the next few
days but that he doubted the Senate could take up the legislation
before next week, as the administration had asked.
Some Republican lawmakers, notably Sen. Orrin G. Hatch
(Utah), the ranking minority member of the judiciary panel, said
they shared Ashcroft's frustration over the delay.
"It's a very dangerous thing," said Hatch, who attended the
meeting late yesterday morning with Ashcroft, Leahy and White
House Counsel Alberto R. Gonzales. "It's time to get off our duffs
and do what's right."
Since the administration delivered its bill to Capitol Hill
almost two weeks ago, negotiations between Senate Judiciary
Committee staff and the Justice Department have proceeded at a
fever pitch. According to participants in the discussions, both
sides had narrowed their differences over the weekend to just a
few issues. One of the most difficult involved an administration
proposal that would allow the FBI and other law enforcement
agencies to share wiretap and grand jury information with the CIA,
the National Security Agency and other intelligence agencies.
Under current law aimed at preventing political abuses by
the executive branch, such information cannot be shared in the
absence of a court order. The administration would have dispensed
with that requirement.
The House negotiators drafted a slightly narrower version
of the administration proposal. Leahy, however, insisted on a
compromise under which agencies could share sensitive information
in times of emergency, so long as they obtained a court order
afterward. White House officials agreed to the compromise in
discussions with committee staff on Sunday but backed off the
agreement this morning, according to Leahy and a Democratic
committee source.
"Right off the bat they said they wanted to pull back from
the language agreed to on Sunday night," the source said. "It was
the last major issue."
A Democratic participant in the talks said the White House
had also backed away from agreement on several other provisions in
the bill, including one relating to the definition of a terrorist
crime. The administration had asked for the removal of statutes of
limitations on all crimes associated with terrorist activity. The
House negotiators as well as Leahy and his staff felt the proposal
was overly broad. They agreed on a measure that would impose no
statute of limitations for the most serious terrorist crimes and a
15-year limit on others, such as destruction of property.
A White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, declined to
comment on the specifics of the dispute. "We're continuing to work
with members of both parties," McClellan said. "The discussions
are positive and ongoing."
Return to Search
Results  Permission
to Republish | |
