Presidential candidates participated in a Senate vote to provide immunity for telephone companies for handing over customer's records to the government. Immunity has become the heart of the debate on government electronic surveillance as Congress has until a Friday deadline to pass legislation before the current, highly criticized substitute, the Protect American Act, expires.

Opposed to legal immunity for telecommunications companies, former Democratic candidate and Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut gave an impassioned 2 1/2 hour speech on the Senate floor Monday night.

"Not only will this bill ratify a domestic spying regime that has already concentrated far too much unaccountable power in the President's hands, in its current form it places above the law the telecommunication companies that may have violated the privacy and trust of millions of American citizens."

But his pleas failed to persuade enough lawmakers. Only 30 fellow Senators, one Independent and 29 Democrats, supported him. Presidential candidate Barack Obama was one. Hillary Clinton did not attend the vote. Republican candidate John McCain voted with his party, in favor of immunity.

Top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee Jay Rockefeller, also supported immunity. He says otherwise, business would be deterred from cooperating with the government in the future.

"This I believe is the right way to go in the security of the nation."

Immunity would relieve telecom companies from indictment. Currently, they are the subject of dozens of lawsuits for allegedly handing over customers internet and phone records to the government with out a warrant. Civil liberties advocates say the law was broken and privacy was violated. The White House has failed to admit the transactions but has lobbied heavily for telecom protection.

Michelle Richardson is with the American Civil Liberties Union.

"We are completely undercutting the accountability structure. In fact companies won't have any incentive to follow any of our privacy laws and will have every incentive to go around them if the know Congress will come and bail them out, no questions asked.

Also failed to pass the Senate were weaker alternatives, one would have switched out the telecom companies for the government in the lawsuits. Supporters of that provision said the telecoms shouldn't be held accountable when the government asked them to comply.

The House passed their version last year. Immunity was not granted. The two versions must be reconciled. Many members of the House of voiced strong opposition to the Senate version. Opponents will work to have it stripped from the final agreement that will be sent to the President.

Rebecca Jeschke is with the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

"The House past a bill called the Restore Act.. [which] does provide for more congressional and judicial oversight... We will work with the House, that's what we have to have our eyes set on now."

The immunity provisions made up just a handful of votes taken on the electronic surveillance legislation. The Senate bill does not require that the intelligence community receive court permission to begin surveillance. Attempts by lawmakers to restrict the government powers and provide protections to civil liberties were rejected.