[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 22]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 30553-30554]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORIZATION OF DOMESTIC NSA SPYING

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. TOM UDALL

                             of new mexico

                    in the house of representatives

                       Sunday, December 18, 2005

  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the 
recent reports, and admission by President Bush, that he authorized the 
National Security Agency to spy domestically, and did so without 
obtaining warrants. Some have noted that it is highly unusual for a 
President to publicly acknowledge the existence of highly classified 
intelligence programs. Some believe this is commendable. But Mr. 
Speaker, his admission was after the fact. After hundreds, possibly 
thousands, of Americans have had their telephone calls and e-mails 
monitored with little to no oversight.

[[Page 30554]]

After he authorized the NSA, an organization tasked with investigating 
foreign people and entities, to spy on American citizens and other 
residents living in this country. And after, Mr. Speaker, he urged the 
New York Times not to report the existence of this program in the first 
place. Hardly commendable.
  Yet these facts alone, though enough to warrant grave concern, are 
not the end of the story. Further compounding the issue is that the 
President did this without even seeking warrants, or legal oversight. I 
wish I could say I was surprised at this, but I cannot. This 
Administration has pushed the envelope for power and authority at every 
opportunity and this is clearly no exception. If truly and absolutely 
necessary, they could have at the very least obtained warrants from the 
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. As the New York Times stated 
today in an editorial, ``The law governing the National Security Agency 
was written after the Vietnam War because the government had made lists 
of people it considered national security threats and spied on them. 
All the same empty points about effective intelligence gathering were 
offered then, just as they are now, and the Congress, the courts and 
the American people rejected them.'' In authorizing this program, this 
Administration has chosen to ignore precedent, wisdom, and possibly 
even the Constitution.
  The Fourth Amendment clearly states ``The right of the people to be 
secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against 
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no 
Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or 
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and 
the persons or things to be seized.'' I strongly believe that spying on 
American citizens without first obtaining warrants, or any legal 
oversight, clearly violates this bedrock principle of our government 
and our Nation as a whole. I also believe that this program--its 
inception, its uses, its results, its justification for existence--
needs to be thoroughly investigated. I have begun circulating a letter 
asking the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to conduct 
investigations of this. I hope my letter will not be ignored.
  Mr. Speaker, no doubt the Administration and its supporters will 
attempt to paint those questioning the wisdom of this program's 
existence as weakening our defenses, and undermining our Nation's 
security and counterterrorism efforts. This is a weak and pathetic 
justification. There is no question the President must have the best 
possible intelligence to protect our Nation and its citizens. There is 
no question the President must conduct programs that are hidden from 
the public eye in order to gather this intelligence. The question is 
whether or not these ends can be achieved in accordance with our 
Constitution, our laws, and in a manner that reflects our values as a 
Nation.
  I hope for the sake of the country, that after the Congress 
investigates this program, it is not shown that the President broke the 
law. However, we will only know the answer to that question after 
Congress exercises its proper oversight responsibility. Something it 
has failed to do for five years. Despite what this Administration would 
have us believe, securing our Nation from all enemies both foreign and 
domestic can be achieved without violations of our civil liberties.

                          ____________________