Changes in communications technology require changes in surveillance techniques and their oversight. However, broad permission to eavesdrop on communications that pass through United States-based equipment with review by the attorney general, as the White House is seeking, goes too far. If lawmakers can’t forge a compromise that maintains the court review requirement – streamlined, if necessary – they should not rush through changes to the wiretapping program this week.

The White House is pushing for changes because of the growth of electronic communications around the world. In Pakistan, where U.S. agents collect intelligence on al-Qaida and the Taliban, the number of cell phone users there grew from fewer than 3 million in 2003 to nearly 50 million this year, according to USA Today.

Much of this communication is routed through U.S. carriers and equipment, triggering protection under domestic wiretapping laws such as the requirement for search warrants. The Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act in 1978 set up a special court to consider requests for such warrants. Obtaining FISA court approval does not appear to be too difficult. The court has rejected, in part, only one application since 2005.

Still, the White House says that process is too slow and is seeking permission to eavesdrop without warrants on international communications before knowing whether all participants are outside the United States. It is apparently pushing for a quick change to the law because the FISA court has reportedly ruled that the administration overstepped its authority by eavesdropping without warrants on international communications that go through switching devices in the United States. Some of the communications could involve participants in the United States.

The White House brought the warrantless wiretapping under the purview of FISA last year when Democrats gained control of Congress and objected to the program. It now wants to exclude part of the program from that review. Worse, it wants this portion under the program to be under the review of the attorney general. Having a three-member court review the need for wiretaps is superior to allowing one individual make that decision, especially someone like Alberto Gonzales who has misled Congress about the eavesdropping program and can’t remember the extent of his involvement in a decision to fire nine U.S. attorneys.

Sen. Olympia Snowe, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, is on the right track in saying that the act needs to be updated to address technological advances, but that judicial review remains necessary.

Although lawmakers are rightly nervous that they’ll be blamed for any terrorist act, the FISA system is generally working and should not be hastily changed.