CONTRARY to White House propaganda, it was never the intent of a growing number of Capitol Hill lawmakers to allow the USA Patriot Act to expire at the end of this year. The intention has always been to amend the anti-terrorism measure passed after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks with stronger civil liberties provisions attached.
Certainly in light of the alarming news that the government has been secretly spying on Americans for more than four years, the Senate was justified in seeking a six-month extension to consider whether to renew permanently certain troublesome provisions of the Patriot Act. The House forced acceptance of a one-month extension instead, which means the review will be accelerated considerably.
Temporary extension of the act wasn't what the President and party leadership wanted, but protecting the rights and freedoms of Americans required it. Somebody had to apply the brakes to the Bush Administration's rush to wrap up action on a new version of a law that is as controversial today as when it was hastily enacted right after 9/11.
Undoubtedly, news of the stunning liberties the administration took with domestic espionage in utter disregard of a federal statute governing such action, gave many in Congress pause when considering the Patriot Act legislation. Some of the act's more controversial provisions, originally set to expire Dec. 31, include giving law enforcement agencies more power to search and seize an array of personal documents from medical and financial records to library lending lists.
Another key provision of the act that bothers civil libertarians is the lower legal threshold for obtaining a warrant to seize material. Instead of the "probable cause" argument customarily required in criminal cases, investigators need only persuade a court that the material to be seized is "relevant" to a terrorism investigation.
There are also sections of the law that permit judicial authorization for "any tangible thing" that investigators want in foreign intelligence investigations, plus liberal allowances for roving wiretaps, the establishment of large databases on people who may or may not be under investigation, and eavesdropping with no judicial oversight under certain conditions.Promoting security is not incompatible with preserving freedom provided adequate safeguards and oversights are clearly included in any expanded authority of the government to conduct search and seizure operations on private citizens. There appears to be little disagreement in Congress that the Patriot Act should survive as a terrorist-fighting tool.
But our civil liberties are in danger of being seriously compromised by a government with too much power to pry into the lives of Americans. We've already seen evidence of that with the Bush Administration's domestic spying program.
Enacting serious evasions of the Constitution won't make the country more secure - only less free.
Keep the Patriot Act but mend it.
Search
advertisement
