WASHINGTON (AP) -- New York Times reporter Judith Miller and the U.S. Justice Department are facing off once again: This time they disagree about a proposed federal law that would allow reporters to keep the identity of their sources secret.Skeptical senators, concerned over Miller's jailing, grilled a Justice Department representative who testified Wednesday that government procedures for getting information from reporters had worked well for 33 years and didn't need to be changed."Here you have a reporter in jail for 85 days and millions of Americans wonder why? I'm one of those," Sen. Arlen Specter said.The Pennsylvania Republican heads the Judiciary Committee, which called Miller and others to testify on a proposed bill that would allow reporters to keep the identity of their sources secret. Specter: 'Chilling effect"Miller's jailing for refusing to discuss her sources with federal prosecutors investigating the disclosure of undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity "has had an obvious chilling effect on other reporters" around the country, Specter said. Representing the Justice Department, Chuck Rosenberg, a U.S. attorney in Texas, declined to discuss the specifics of Miller's case but said, "We should not enter this debate believing that the First Amendment is under assault by the Department of Justice. Manifestly it is not." Rosenberg said that since 1991 only 12 of 243 subpoenas issued under Justice Department guidelines to news media called for confidential source information. "We seek information about confidential sources from reporters only when it really, really matters," Rosenberg said. "What is broken about the way we are handling subpoenas to the media?"Government opposes shield lawHe added, "I don't see anything in our work that justifies discarding 33 years of careful practice that has served the nation well." On her way into the hearing, Miller offered a different view: "We need a federal shield law. That's why I'm here. I went through a lot to be able to make this statement." Former U.S. attorney Joseph DiGenova suggested that the committee enact the existing guidelines into law, so reporters could get courts to enforce them. Rosenberg said even that would be a bad idea because court appeals could delay action at times "when we need to move fast." "Is that your argument -- to have no bill at all?" asked Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat."Yes," Rosenberg replied. In her testimony, Miller acknowledged her own stories suggesting Iraq had weapons of mass destruction were flawed by sources with wrong information. But she argued that "even flawed reporters should not be jailed for protecting even flawed sources." Many sources with accurate information needed by the public will provide it only to reporters who promise confidentiality even before the reporter can assess the information, Miller said. In prepared testimony submitted for the record, Rosenberg countered that the bill as drafted would seriously impede the government's ability to "enforce the law, fight terrorism and protect the national security." Miller's fight has given new life to the federal shield idea that Congress has ignored for decades. Two Indiana Republicans, Rep. Mike Pence and Sen. Richard Lugar, introduced the Free Flow of Information Act in January. Jailing renews interest in billWednesday marked the second hearing on the bill since Miller was locked up for refusing to reveal her sources to Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, who was directed by the Justice Department to investigate the disclosure of undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame's identity. Plame's name was exposed in July 2003 by columnist Robert Novak, who has been a frequent CNN commentator. The column came eight days after Plame's husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, wrote in a Times opinion piece that the Bush administration had manipulated intelligence about Iraqi weapons programs to justify going to war. Wilson and others have argued Plame was exposed to intimidate critics of President Bush's Iraq policy. Miller, 57, never wrote about Plame but was jailed for contempt of court for not being willing to testify about her sources. She was freed on September 29 after saying Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, had released her from her obligation to keep his name secret.Miller noted that some have said her source "did not deserve confidentiality because his motives were not pure." But she argued that while journalists should try to learn leakers' motives, "what counts far more ... is the truth and significance of what they are saying."On Tuesday, Miller told a journalists' convention in Las Vegas: "I did not go to jail to protect wrongdoing. I did not go to jail to get a large book contract or to martyr myself. Anyone who thinks I would spend 85 days in jail as a canny career move knows nothing about jail and nothing about me."Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.