One More Act for The Patriot Act
Congress tries to square civil liberties with the terror war
So the real controversy is over a handful of surveillance measures that have troubled civil libertarians since the act's inception. Under the so-called library provision, the FBI can demand from businesses "any tangible things," including books, records, papers, documents, and other items it deems necessary for a foreign intelligence investigation. Opponents say to avoid unwarranted fishing expeditions, the agency should prove that the records sought are not only relevant to an investigation but also pertain to a foreign power or agent, or to someone who has been in contact with a terrorist or spy. The main sponsor of the act's renewal, House Judiciary Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner, has launched an E-mail campaign to highlight dozens of civil liberties safeguards already included in the proposed reauthorization bill.
Under the current act, federal agents can also easily issue so-called National Security Letters that give the G-men unfettered access to individuals' financial information--from credit reports to real estate transactions. Though the letters predate the Patriot Act, their reach was broadened and their use proliferated: A Washington Post story reported a hundredfold increase over historic norms. The Patriot Act barred businesses from telling anyone if a client's personal information had been collected from them. Critics want that gag order lifted. They seek a change that will allow recipients of the letters to challenge them in court. Backers say the provision is an essential tool for secretly tracking terrorists.
Critics also want the government to notify within seven days the targets of "sneak and peek" clandestine break-ins of homes or businesses. The act currently requires notification within a "reasonable period." And they are asking that the controversial provisions, if reauthorized, come up for renewal again in the future to guarantee oversight.
Taking sides. President Bush has accused senators who blocked the Patriot Act's reauthorization of acting irresponsibly and "endanger[ing] the lives of our citizens." But opponents say there is growing concern about the government's intrusion into the lives of ordinary Americans. "After 9/11, people were very frightened and upset about what had happened, but now they are recognizing that safety and constitutional rights are not mutually exclusive," says Caroline Fredrickson of the American Civil Liberties Union.
But with Feingold and other senators saying they won't budge until the bill is changed, and Sensenbrenner and the White House standing firm, reforms--if they come at all--may arrive later rather than sooner. Jeff Lungren, Sensenbrenner's spokesman, said his boss isn't looking to make a deal with senators. "Areas of compromise? We've already done those," Lungren said. "We already put in dozens of civil liberties protections."
Time is not on the Patriot Act's side. The House is not back in session until January 31; the Senate is preoccupied with Judge Samuel Alito's confirmation, and Senate Judiciary Committee hearings are planned for February on the administration's domestic-spying program. So it seems almost certain the dispute will linger beyond the February deadline. That means the Patriot Act may have to do the limbo more than a little while longer.
advertisement
