Original Article Poll: Most in U.S. say warrants necessary Minority favors wiretaps here Katherine Shrader Associated Press Jan. 8, 2006 12:00 AM WASHINGTON - A majority of Americans want the Bush administration to get court approval before eavesdropping on people inside the United States, even if those calls might involve suspected terrorists, an AP-Ipsos Poll shows. Over the past three weeks, President Bush and top aides have defended the electronic monitoring program they secretly launched shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, as a vital tool to protect the nation from al-Qaida and its affiliates. Yet 56 percent of respondents in an AP-Ipsos poll said the government should be required to first get a court warrant to eavesdrop on the overseas calls and e-mails of U.S. citizens when those communications are believed to be tied to terrorism. Agreeing with the White House, 42 percent of those surveyed do not believe the court approval is necessary. "We're at war," Bush said during a New Year's Day visit to San Antonio. "And as commander in chief, I've got to use the resources at my disposal, within the law, to protect the American people. . . . It's a vital, necessary program." According to the poll, age matters in how people view the monitoring. Nearly two-thirds of those ages 18 to 29 believe warrants should be required, while people 65 and older are evenly divided. Party affiliation is a factor, too. Almost three-fourths of Democrats and one-third of Republicans want to require court warrants. Cynthia Ice-Bones, 32, a Republican from Sacramento, said knowing about the program made her feel a bit safer. "I think our security is so important that we don't need warrants. If you're doing something we shouldn't be doing, then you ought to be caught," she said. But Peter Ahr of Caldwell, N.J., a religious studies professor at Seton Hall University, said he could not find a justification for skipping judicial approvals. Nor did he believe the administration's argument that such a step would impair terrorism investigations. "We're a nation of laws. . . . That means that everybody has to live by the law, including the administration," said Ahr, 64, a Democrat who argues for checks and balances. "For the administration to simply go after wiretaps on their own without anyone else's say-so is a violation of that principle." The eavesdropping is run by the National Security Agency. Some members of Congress have raised concerns about the president's actions, but none of the lawmakers who have been briefed on the program has called for its immediate halt. GOP Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has promised hearings this year. Five members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, including GOP Sens. Olympia Snowe of Maine and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, have called for immediate inquiries. On top of that, a memo circulated Friday from two legal analysts at the Congressional Research Service concluded that the justification for the monitoring may not be as strong as the administration has argued. The NSA's activity "may present an exercise of presidential power at its lowest ebb," the 44-page memo said. The issue is full of grays for some people interviewed for the poll, including Harlon Bennett, 21, a political independent from Wellston, Okla. He does not think the government should need warrants for suspected terrorists. "Of course," he added, "we all could be suspected terrorists." The AP-Ipsos Poll on public attitudes about eavesdropping on communications between people in the United States and suspected terrorists was conducted Tuesday through Thursday. It is based on telephone interviews with 1,001 adults from all states except Alaska and Hawaii. The margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.