Story by the Associated Press; curated by Oliver Darcy.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Republican-led House voted late Thursday to impose new curbs on government spying of Americans as revelations of the secretive National Security Agency’s bulk collection of phone records still reverberate a year later.
In a surprise vote, the House backed an amendment to a $570 billion defense spending bill that would bar warrantless collection of personal online information and prohibit access for the NSA and CIA into commercial tech products.
“The American people are sick of being spied on,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who joined with libertarian Republicans and liberal Democrats to push the measure.
That coalition complained that their tough provisions had been stripped from House-passed legislation earlier this year, requiring them to add the measure to the defense bill. Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and other leading Republicans objected to the effort but couldn’t sway the rank and file.
The vote was 293-123.
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) June 20, 2014
I told @RepThomasMassie we were going to win tonight.
— Justin Amash (@repjustinamash) June 20, 2014
It came one year after leaker Edward Snowden’s disclosures about the NSA’s actions and nearly a year after the House narrowly rejected a measure by Rep. Justin Amash, R-Mich., to rein in the NSA.
The House is expected to finish the defense bill on Friday after it added tough, new restrictions on President Barack Obama’s handling of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Republicans and some Democrats have repeatedly blocked any effort to shutter the post-Sept. 11 prison to house terror suspects, and congressional furor over Obama’s trade last month of five Taliban leaders for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl prompted a bipartisan effort to add fresh obstacles.
The administration exchanged Bergdahl, held captive by the Taliban since 2009, for five Taliban officials who had been at Guantanamo for more than a decade. The five were sent to Qatar, where they are to remain for a year.
Lawmakers were outraged that Obama failed to notify Congress of the exchange within 30 days, as required by law. The bill would bar 85 percent of the funds in the account for overseas conflicts until Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel reassures Congress that congressional notification on Guantanamo transfers will be respected.
During debate on Thursday, the House backed two other limits on the president’s handling of detainees, voting 230-184 for an amendment by Rep. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., that would impose a one-year moratorium on any transfers of Guantanamo detainees. Cotton said the move was necessary so Congress could investigate “the president’s lawless release of the Taliban five.”
Cotton said the current Guantanamo population of 149 is “not goat-herders. These are the worst of the worst.”
Rep. Peter Visclosky, D-Ind., countered that no one in the administration is even talking about transferring the worst enemy combatants, among them Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-professed mastermind of the Sept. 11 attack. He complained that the measure would prevent the president from transferring detainees already cleared for movement.
The House also backed an amendment by Rep. Jackie Walorski, R-Ind., that would bar funds for transferring Guantanamo detainees to Yemen.
The legislation for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1 would provide the funds for military operations, including actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as weapons and military personnel. The White House has objected to the legislation, complaining about the Guantanamo restrictions and attempts to spare weapons from Pentagon cost-cutters.
Wary of U.S. re-engagement in Iraq three years after combat troops left, two Democrats — Rep. John Garamendi of California and Colleen Hanabusa of Hawaii — won voice vote approval for an amendment requiring the president to seek congressional approval for sustained military action in Iraq.
“This miscalculation is not worth repeating,” Hanabusa said of Iraq during the debate. The vote came hours after Obama announced that he would dispatch up to 300 military advisers to help quell the growing insurgency in Iraq.
Garamendi said Obama’s efforts to boost security at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad should require no congressional action, but he said unmanned air strikes amount to an act of war and need approval.
“There are many people in the House of Representatives that are deeply concerned about the slippery slope that we are apparently about to step on,” Garamendi said in an interview.
Other House Democrats directly challenged Obama’s authority as commander in chief, with lawmakers asserting that their efforts reflected a war-weary nation after more than a decade of conflict, thousands of American lives lost and billions of dollars spent.
Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., offered amendments to bar funds for combat operations in Iraq, prevent money from being spent under the 2002 law authorizing military force in Iraq and cut off funds for Afghanistan after 2014.
“It’s time to get out and stay out,” said Rep. Rick Nolan, D-Minn.
Democrats blamed the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and insisted that the sectarian violence is his problem. The U.S. military had done its job. “We have trained these people up the wazoo,” said Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn.
The House voted down all three measures.
In an overwhelming vote, the House rejected the Pentagon’s plan to retire the A-10 Warthog, the close air support aircraft with plenty of allies on Capitol Hill. The 300-114 vote reversed the Appropriations Committee’s initial backing for the administration’s cost-cutting move.
Featured image via @RepThomasMassie