Five members of the Senate Intelligence Committee - two Republicans and three Democrats - called for a joint investigation by their panel and the Senate's Judiciary Committee, saying revelations that Bush authorized spying on U.S. residents without court approval "require immediate inquiry and action by the Senate."

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said he was discussing the possibility of hearings with various committee chairmen, but he didn't pledge to hold any. Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada said he preferred for each committee to conduct independent inquiries.

Signing the letter requesting an inquiry were Republican Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Olympia Snowe of Maine, and Democratic Sens. Carl Levin of Michigan, Ron Wyden of Oregon and Dianne Feinstein of California.

"It is critical that Congress determine, as quickly as possible, exactly what collection activities were authorized, what were actually undertaken, how many names and numbers were involved over what period, and what was the asserted legal authority for such activities," the five wrote.

Separately, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., had said previously that his panel would conduct hearings into the matter next month.

Cheney forcefully defended the previously secret spying program - disclosed last Friday by The New York Times - and said that Bush's critics could pay a political price.

"Either we're serious about fighting the war on terror or we're not," Cheney told reporters during a visit to Pakistan.

He said the Bush administration has used tools like the surveillance program aggressively to fight the war on terror, and "it's not an accident that we haven't been hit in four years. ... If there's a (public) backlash pending, I think the backlash is going to be against those who are suggesting somehow we shouldn't have taken these steps in order to defend the country."

But most criticism so far has been directed at Bush. Lawmakers from both parties question the eavesdropping program's legality. By setting it up, Bush bypassed a federal law that requires court approval for domestic surveillance.

The spying program targeted suspected terrorists and their supporters communicating between the United States and foreign countries.

The clamor over the spying came as the Senate debated renewal of the Patriot Act, the anti-terrorism law that expanded police powers. Democrats and a handful of Republicans have asked for a three-month extension of the law to add more civil liberties protections. But the law expires Dec. 31 and Bush and Frist have refused to accept the extension.

Specter on Tuesday challenged Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' defense of the spying operation. Gonzales had said Monday that the administration hadn't sought to change existing law to permit such spying because it feared Congress wouldn't approve. But he also said that Congress' 2001 resolution authorizing force to prevent another terrorist attack gave the president implicit authority to order the plan.

"If he didn't think he could get Congress to act, why does he think Congress intended to give those broad powers in the force resolution," Specter said.

Some leading conservatives also weighed in.

"It's more power than King George had at the time of the (American) revolution," conservative legal scholar Bruce Fein said Monday on NPR's "Diane Rehm Show." "He doesn't believe in separation of powers, and that's what makes this so dangerous."

But another conservative legal scholar came to Bush's defense. John Yoo, a law professor at the University of California in Berkeley and a former top Justice Department official under Bush, said the Constitution gives the president broad powers as commander in chief in time of war.

"The Constitution creates a presidency that is uniquely structured to act forcefully and independently to repel serious threats to the nation. ... The Framers understood that war would require the speed, decisiveness and secrecy that only the presidency could bring," Yoo wrote in Tuesday's Los Angeles Times.

Bush also faced criticism Tuesday for telling an audience in 2004 - well after he had authorized the secret surveillance program - that the government didn't engage in eavesdropping without court approval.

"Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires - a wiretap requires a court order. ... When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so," Bush said in a speech promoting the Patriot Act.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said he didn't consider Bush's comments misleading because the president was talking about the Patriot Act, not the then-secret surveillance program.

Meanwhile, some liberals argued that Bush's actions could constitute an impeachable offense, but senior Democrats shied away from that language. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said she had asked presidential scholars to determine whether the spying program could be deemed an impeachable act.

"I think that goes way ahead of the information that's before us," said Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois, the Senate's second-ranking Democrat. "At the first instance what we need to do is get to the bottom of it, understand what legal authority, if any, this administration had to spy on Americans."

Copyright © 2005 Knight Ridder

###