House locks doors to talk surveillance

WASHINGTON — House doors were locked Thursday night as lawmakers prepared for their first closed session in 25 years to debate surveillance legislation.

Republicans requested privacy for what they termed "an honest debate" on the new Democratic eavesdropping bill that is opposed by the White House and most Republicans in Congress.

The private session was scheduled for nighttime so the House chamber could be swept by security personnel to make sure there were no listening or recording devices.

The last such session in the House was in 1983 on U.S. support for paramilitary operations in Nicaragua. Only five closed sessions have taken place in the House since 1825.

Many Democrats initially objected, calling it a political ploy by Republicans to delay the vote. Indeed, it did: House leaders pushed off the scheduled vote until Friday, just before taking a two-week recess. If passed, the bill would have to be approved by the Senate.

President Bush vowed to veto the House Democrats' version of the terrorist surveillance bill, saying it would undermine the nation's security.

Bush opposes it in part because it doesn't provide full, retroactive legal protection to telecommunications companies that helped the government eavesdrop on their customers without court permission after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

About 40 lawsuits have been filed against telecommunications companies by people and organizations alleging they violated wiretapping and privacy laws. The lawsuits have been combined and are pending before a single federal judge in California.

The Democrats' measure would encourage the judge to review in private the secret government documents underpinning the program in order to decide whether the companies acted lawfully. If they did, the lawsuits would be dismissed.

The administration has prevented those documents from being revealed, even to a judge, by invoking the state secrets privilege. That puts the companies in a bind because they cannot use the documents to defend themselves in court.

It wasn't clear what information would be presented in the closed session. Just a fraction of Congress has been allowed to read secret documents underpinning the surveillance program, and those who have arrived at varying conclusions.