I didn't see the program. I'm sure that no Senator will propose an activity that "outs classified information." The differences between the various approaches are how stern to get with the President (accusatory Commission or "work with the administration"?), who will provide oversight (if any) in advance of surveillance (courts or self-policed by administration? - will Congress review the program and compose legislation that legitimizes the disclosed activity?), and what will the form of oversight be (if any) post-facto (Courts on a periodic review? Courts on a case by case basis? Reports to Congress?).
There will be a question about what is enough "probable cause" to justify surveillance, and I think that question will only be answered on a case-by-case basis, post facto, by the courts. The enemy combatant detention cases are a prelude to the inevitable -- assuming there will be a criminal prosecution that depends on the terrorist surveillance program for probable cause.
Roberts told the Times that he does not believe much support exists among lawmakers for exempting the program from the control of the FISA court. That is the approach Bush has favored and one that would be established under a bill proposed by Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio.http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2006/02/18/ap2537282.html
I haven't found a statement by DeWine or the WH that particularly describes his approach. I think it's a mistake to put this "Constitutionality" question in the hands of Congress, because the Courts will second guess the decision at some point in the future. Better to have the Courts second guessing each other. That is, I don't think a Congressional "it's okay" would provide the kind of judicial certainty that ALL the government players seek.
Yet again, you have me trumped with great points...
When reading your post, I was reminded of the attempts Congress has made to make "partial birth abortion" illegal...and yet a judge somewhere is constantly calling those laws unconstitutional...so, it seems that Congress does have a problem with their law writing in judicial circles anyway.
I saw that weasel Wesley Clark on Fox this afternoon, and he was asked about Kofi Annen's call for Gitmo to be closed down...
Wesley says that these detainees are a world wide problem, and that they should be tried in an International Court...and taken out of American jurisdiction..
Wouldn't that put the troops that captured them in danger of liability through and International Court...a court that President Bush does NOT subscribe to??