The day before the big vote on the Amash-Conyers Amendment to protect the 4th Amendment from encroachments by the NSA, someone on a discussion group I participate in asked how the Democratic leaders would vote. I pointed out that Hoyer already had his national security puppet, Dutch Ruppersberger, yell and scream about it in terms of Bush era terrorist scare tactics, signaling that Hoyer would oppose the amendment and that conservative shills Steve Israel and Debbie Wasserman Schultz would follow. As for Pelosi, I said that I couldn't imagine her going up against Obama on something this important to him-- and that I would eat my favorite Dodgers baseball cap if she voted for the amendment.So, of course, I wasn't in the slightest bit surprised when Pelosi, once again, betrayed the liberal principles that were once the foundation of her rise to power. John Hudson, writing Thursday evening for Foreign Policy, didn't seem surprised either. According to a Democratic committee aid with knowledge of the caucus deliberations "Pelosi privately and aggressively lobbied wayward Democrats to torpedo the amendment" and that many in Washington are giving her the "credit" for killing it.
Pelosi had meetings and made a plea to vote against the amendment and that had a much bigger effect on swing Democratic votes against the amendment than anything [NSA chief Keith] Alexander had to say," said the source, keeping in mind concerted White House efforts to influence Congress by Alexander and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. "Had Pelosi not been as forceful as she had been, it's unlikely there would've been more Democrats for the amendment."With 111 liberal-to-moderate Democrats voting for the amendment alongside 94 Republicans, the vote in no way fell along predictable ideological fault lines. And for a particular breed of Democrat, Pelosi's overtures proved decisive, multiple sources said."Pelosi had a big effect on more middle-of-the road hawkish Democrats who didn't want to be identified with a bunch of lefties [voting for the amendment]," said the aide. "As for the Alexander briefings: Did they hurt? No, but that was not the central force, at least among House Democrats. Nancy Pelosi's political power far outshines that of Keith Alexander's."But despite the minority leader's instrumental role in swaying the vote, you won't find her taking credit: She's busy protecting her left flank from liberal supporters of Amash's amendment-- some of whom openly booed her at last month's Netroots Nation conference, in which she defended President Obama's NSA surveillance program.When contacted, a Pelosi aide did not dispute the minority leader's assertive role in influencing Democrats, but passed along a letter Pelosi sent to the president today raising skepticism about the NSA's surveillance powers."Dear Mr. President," reads the letter. "Although the amendment was defeated 205-217, it is clear that concerns remain about the continued implementation of the program in its current form. Although some of us voted for and others against the amendment, we all agree that there are lingering questions and concerns about the current 215 collection program."The letter goes on to question whether the bulk metadata collection program sufficiently protects the privacy of Americans, whether it could be tailored more narrowly and whether the law is being implemented in a manner consistent with Congress's intent.Pelosi is no stranger to intelligence issues; she was a member of the House's intelligence committee in the aftermath of the September 9/11 attacks. In recent years, she's grown increasingly skeptical of surveillance powers authorized by the PATRIOT Act, which she voted against in 2005 when it was up for reauthorization and again in February. "Well, I didn't vote for the PATRIOT Act the last time it was up," she said today, at her weekly press briefing. "I don't want anybody to misunderstand a vote against the Amash resolution yesterday."At the briefing, she emphasized her current effort circulating a letter for members to sign expressing concern over how metadata is collected. "The Administration is the custodian of the information. The ownership belongs to the American people," she said. "And we, as their Representatives, have to make decisions about it, we have to know more about it."
