The date 9/11/01 changed America forever, such that it was clear something was needed to ensure this horrible atrocity never happened again. But what? Many people, including the Bush Administration, pointed to a failure in intelligence gathering and interpretation, and rightly so. However, instead of looking at the specific areas of intelligence failures that could have caused this horrible atrocity to occur, the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act began taking shape just days after the attacks. This was certainly not enough time for an effective investigation of intelligence to take place, or to draft a properly responsive bill to those issues.
Yet the final bill passed both houses with an overwhelming majority, and was signed into law on October 26, 2001. Finally the American people could take a breath in relief and stop worrying about a second attack to come at any moment, because now the USA PATRIOT
Act had been passed, and with a name like that it must be for the good of patriotic Americans everywhere.
The only Senator to vote against the PATRIOT Act was Wisconsin's own Russ Feingold. In an address before the Associated Press Managing Editors Conference at the Milwaukee Art Museum, he explained why he voted against the PATRIOT Act:
"It is one thing to shortcut the legislative process in order to get federal financial aid to the cities hit by terrorism... It is quite another to press for the enactment of sweeping new powers for law enforcement that directly affect the civil liberties of the American people without due deliberation by the peoples' elected representatives."
Feingold is not unpatriotic; on the contrary he loves his country, and his closing statement is an affirmation of that:
"Protecting the safety of the American people is a solemn duty of the Congress; we must work tirelessly to prevent more tragedies like the devastating attacks of September 11th. We must prevent more children from losing their mothers, more wives from losing their husbands, and more firefighters from losing their brave and heroic colleagues. But the Congress will fulfill its duty only when it protects both the American people and the freedoms at the foundation of American society. So let us preserve our heritage of basic rights. Let us practice that liberty. And let us fight to maintain that freedom that we call America."
Are Senator Feingold's insights on the act shared only by himself and partisan left-wingers who want to defame President Bush? No. People from all political spectrums, race, religion, sex, and occupation have expressed their displeasure with this act. What exactly, then, is wrong with the Act? I call it the Bill of Rights.
The Fourth Amendment states:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
In contrast, Section 213 of the Act allows for investigators who have a search warrant to seize your property without informing you prior to the search. This provision ignores the fact that investigators may arrive at the wrong house. Also, if the warrant is for a stolen bicycle, for example, they could rummage through your dresser drawers even though there is no chance that a bike would be there.
Section 214 changes certain prior restraints on obtaining wire taps, and what of wire taps can be approved. For example, previously a wire tap could be obtained without probable cause if the purpose was for gathering foreign intelligence, and not to build a criminal case against someone later. The PATRIOT Act allows for that wire tap to be obtained without probable cause, and information gathered can be used when prosecuting a suspected criminal.
Section 215 allows investigators to obtain personal information on anyone, from library records to internet search history, simply at the mention that a person may be part of an ongoing investigation against terrorists. Furthermore, libraries that give up their records to investigators cannot inform their patrons that their personal information has been passed on. Not only does this section severely undermine due process as provided in the Fifth Amendment, but it violates the First--our most sacred Amendment, freedom of speech-- since the written text is a form of speech, and it is our right to be influenced by whatever we wish without fear of reprisal from society or the government if those beliefs happen to be different.
The most alarming section is section 802. This section defines domestic terrorism as "...activities that involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State." Wow, could that be any broader? Under this definition, speeding on the highway could be considered an act of domestic terrorism.
Another way to become a domestic terrorist is to "...appear to be intended to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion." Thank God that this is in here, because we all know how dangerous it is to peaceably assemble and explain our grievances concerning our democratic country to our representatives. And besides, it's not like these things are protected in the First Amendment or anything.
With all these loop holes and broad definitions, surely excessive oversight by Congress must be provided for. Yes, it does state that the Attorney General must present numbers of warrants and wiretap papers, but numbers mean nothing if you don't have the information regarding the warrants and wiretaps.
So what can we as Americans do to protest this act of haste? According to figures on the Bill of Rights Defense Committee's website,
1 205 communities, as well as Hawaii, Alaska, and Vermont--encompassing 26.1 million people--have passed resolutions doing everything from expressing their disfavor of the bill to instructing local law enforcement to adhere to the requirements of obtaining and executing search warrants in pre-PATRIOT Act fashion.
Douglas county and Madison have both passed resolutions expressing their disfavor with the act, and Eau Claire may also go that route.
Last Tuesday, Nov. 4, a PATRIOT Act workshop was organized by the Chippewa Valley chapter of the ACLU of Wisconsin. It was held in the L.E. Phillips Library to look at various resolutions and try to get the ball rolling on efforts in Eau Claire and surrounding communities to pass a resolution.
Ann Heywood, president of the Chippewa Valley chapter, started the gathering of more than fifty people with a broad overview of what they hoped to accomplish: "Our goal is to say something to our government... to protect our liberties." Following the executive director of the ACLU-WI, Chris Ahmuty took the podium and discussed problems with the PATRIOT Act, citing a few cases where questionable activities have been going on.
For example, an officer's obituary was published in a Fresno, California newspaper and citizens began to recognize him as sitting in during their peace meetings. Ahmuty also said that the execution of the PATRIOT Act would "add more hay to the stack" and therefore make it more difficult to find terrorists than before. There were three ways he said we could respond to the PATRIOT Act: "Regret, report, and resist."
The direction that the Eau Claire resolution seems to be going is regret: identifying what is wrong with the PATRIOT Act, and making a symbolic stand against it. Reporting at this point seems difficult since, as I observed from the heavily blacked out National Security letter which has the same force as a warrant, the government seems to be overly secretive of their information. Resistance is seen as a little too extreme at this time.
To get involved in the resolution process that is happening in Eau Claire, or to pick up some ideas that you can implement in your own hometown, a second meeting is scheduled Tuesday, November 18 at 8pm in the Chippewa Room at the L.E. Phillips Library.
One last thing to think about. Benjamin Franklin once said, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
For further information about the USA PATRIOT Act, visit:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html, and
http://www.aclu.org/safeandfree/safeandfree.cfm?ID=12263&c=206.
