It Is About Freaking Time!!! Better Late Than Never TYVM

Democrats author

70-page dissent on

Patriot Act

reauthorization

Larisa Alexandrovna

House Judiciary Democrats have prepared a 70-page dissent opposing the renewal of the U.S. Patriot and Intelligence Reform Reauthorization Act, RAW STORY has learned.

Unlike some Democratic opposition, those decrying the Patriot Act include a diverse panoply of voices: 389 communities and seven states have passed resolutions opposing parts of the PATRIOT Act, representing over 62 million people, they note.

Groups running the gamut of the political spectrum oppose certain sections of the PATRIOT Act, including the American Civil Liberties Union, American Conservative Union, American Immigration Lawyers Association, American Library Association, Gun Owners of America and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).

The dissent cites repeated abuse of the Act by police and law enforcement.

Among the more troubling, perhaps, for RAW STORY readers: "It has been used to unconstitutionally coerce an Internet Service Provider to divulge information about e-mail activity and web surfing on its system, and then to gag that Provider from even disclosing the abuse to the public."

The ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee is Rep. John Conyers (D-MI). The Democrats' extended dissent follows.

###

Dissenting Views to H.R. 3199, the “USA PATRIOT and Intelligence Reform Reauthorization Act of 2005.”

We dissent from the passage of H.R. 3199 in its present form.

We oppose this legislation for several reasons. First, we never have been given the facts necessary to fully evaluate the operation of the PATRIOT Act. Second, there are numerous provisions in both the expiring and other sections of the PATRIOT Act that have little to do with combating terrorism, intrude on our privacy and civil liberties, and have been subject to repeated abuse and misuse by the Justice Department. Third, the legislation does nothing to address the many unilateral civil rights and civil liberties abuses by the Administration since the September 11 attacks. Finally, the bill does not provide law enforcement with any additional real and meaningful tools necessary to help our nation prevail in the war against terrorism. Since 2002, 389 communities and seven states have passed resolutions opposing parts of the PATRIOT Act, representing over 62 million people. Additionally, numerous groups ranging the political spectrum have come forward to oppose certain sections of the PATRIOT Act and to demand that Congress conduct more oversight on its use, including the American Civil Liberties Union, American Conservative Union, American Immigration Lawyers Association, American Library Association, Center for Constitutional Rights, Center for Democracy and Technology, Common Cause, , Free Congress Foundation, Gun Owners of America, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, People for the American Way, and numerous groups concerned about immigrants’ rights.
While the PATRIOT Act may not deserve all of the ridicule that is heaped against it, there is little doubt that the legislation has been repeatedly and seriously misused by the Justice Department. Consider the following:

• It has been used more than 150 times to secretly search an individual’s home, with nearly 90% of those cases having had nothing to do with terrorism.

• It was used against Brandon Mayfield, an innocent Muslim American, to tap his phones, seize his property, copy his computer files, spy on his children, and take his DNA, all without his knowledge.

• It has been used to deny, on account of his political beliefs, the admission to the United States of a Swiss citizen and prominent Muslim Scholar to teach at Notre Dame University.

• It has been used to unconstitutionally coerce an Internet Service Provider to divulge information about e-mail activity and web surfing on its system, and then to gag that Provider from even disclosing the abuse to the public.

• Because of gag restrictions, we will never know how many times it has been used to obtain reading records from library and bookstores, but we do know that libraries have been solicited by the Department of Justice – voluntarily or under threat of the PATRIOT Act – for reader information on more than 200 occasions since September 11.

• It has been used to charge, detain and prosecute a Muslim student in Idaho for posting Internet website links to objectionable materials, even though the same links were available on the U.S. Government’s web site.

Even worse than the PATRIOT Act has been the abuse of unilateral powers by the Administration. Since September 11, our government has detained and verbally and physically abused thousands of immigrants without time limit, for unknown and unspecified reasons, and targeted tens of thousands of Arab-Americans for intensive interrogations and immigration screenings. All this serves to accomplish is to alienate Muslim and Arab Americans – the key groups to fighting terrorism in our own county – who see a Justice Department that has institutionalized racial and ethnic profiling, without the benefit of a single terrorism conviction.

Nor is it helpful when our government condones the torture of prisoners at home and abroad, authorizes the monitoring of mosques and religious sites without any indication of criminal activity, and detains scores of individuals as material witnesses because it does not have evidence to indict them. This makes our citizens less safe not more safe, and undermines our role as a beacon of democracy and freedom.

While the Majority asserts it is not the duty of this Committee to respond to these abuses, we believe that ignoring these and other cases of abuse by our own government constitutes an abdication of our responsibility as legislators, and should be addressed by this legislation.

The following is a brief background and description of the PATRIOT Act and the proposed reauthorization legislation, followed by a listing of our various concerns with the legislation.

Table of Contents

I. Background and Description of Legislation

II. We Have Never Been Given the Necessary Facts to Properly Evaluate the PATRIOT Act
III. There are Numerous Provisions in Both the Expiring and Other Parts of the PATRIOT Act that are Largely Unrelated to Terrorism and Unnecessarily Intrude on Privacy Rights and Other Civil Liberties
A. Specific Concerns with Expiring Provisions
1. Sec. 206- Roving Surveillance Authority under
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
2. Sec. 209- Seizure of Voicemail Messages
Pursuant to Warrants
3. Sec. 212- Emergency Disclosures of Communications
Held by Phone Companies and Internet Service Providers
4. Sec. 214- Pen Register and Trap and Trace Authority
Under FISA
5. Sec. 215- Access to Records and Other Items under the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (Library Provision)
6. Sec. 218- Foreign Intelligence Information
7. Sec. 220- Nationwide Service of Search Warrants for
Electronic Evidence
8. “Lone Wolves” as Agents of a Foreign Power

B. Specific Concerns with Other Provisions of the Patriot Act
1. Sec. 213- Authority for Delaying Notice of the
Execution of a Warrant (Sneak and Peek Provision)
2. Sec. 216 Extension of Trap and Trace/Pen Orders
3. Sec. 411- Revocation of Visas
4.Sec. 412 - Detention of Immigrants
5. Sec. 505- Miscellaneous National Security Authorities
“National Security Letters”
6. Sec. 802- Definition of Domestic Terrorism
7. Sec. 805- Material Support for Terrorism

C. General Concerns with Patriot Act Reauthorization
1. Lack of a General Sunset
2. Lack of General Oversight

IV. The Legislation Does Nothing to Address the Many Unilateral Abuses of The Administration in the War Against Terror
A. Material Witness Statute
B. Torture
C. Rendition
D. Enemy Combatants
E. Selective Enforcement of Immigration Provision/Racial Profiling
F. Excessive Collection of Personal Data
G. Unauthorized Detention of Aliens
H. Closed Immigration Trials
I. Attorney General’s Guidelines on Domestic Surveillance
J. Mis-Classification of Terrorism Investigations
K. Safe Havens for Terrorist Assets

V. The Legislation Does Not Provide Law Enforcement with the Resources and Tools It Needs to Meaningfully Combat Terrorism
A. Preventing Terrorists from Buying Guns
B. Preventing the Sale and Manufacture of .50-caliber Guns
C. Regulating the Sale of Smokeless and Black Powder
D. Increasing Grants to First Responders
E. Securing our Nation’s Ports
F. Eliminating Trade with Terrorist Countries
G. Penalizing those who Leak Classified Information
H. Improving the Terrorist Watch List

VI. Description of Amendments Offered by Democratic Members

VII. Conclusion

Continues...Here