Patriot Act Becomes a Bipartisan Political Battlefield

Patriot Act Becomes a Bipartisan Political Battlefield

Wes Vernon, NewsMax.com
Wednesday, Aug. 27, 2003

See part one, New Fight Rages Over Patriot Act.

WASHINGTON – Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, has introduced legislation she says would "continue the nation’s fight against terrorism while protecting the civil liberties of law-abiding Americans." It would revise several sections of the USA Patriot Act, enacted in the immediate aftermath of 9/11.

People on both sides of the growing debate over that law say Americans are in danger of losing some of their most cherished freedoms. Attorney General John Ashcroft says "America will pay the price in lost liberty" without the Patriot Act. Privacy advocates say parts of the law contribute to "lost liberty."

Steve Lilienthal, a policy analyst at Free Congress Foundation (FCF) says many parts of the Patriot Act "were so vaguely worded that they lowered the standards necessary to investigate alleged wrongdoing."

Sen. Murkowski’s "midcourse correction" bill is one of many. But coming from a Republican in a GOP Congress, it is receiving a huge amount of attention. Moreover, she has enlisted co-sponsorship across the aisle from Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore.

The Alaska lawmaker would:

narrow law enforcement’s authority to conduct secret "sneak and peak" searches of a suspect’s property.

modify the definition of "domestic terrorism" to the commission of a terrorist act while in a U.S. jurisdiction.

narrowly define types of Internet usage and e-mail information that can be obtained.

narrow the definition of what can trigger electronic surveillance.

provide greater judicial review of government requests for educational records.

The legislation, introduced just before the current congressional recess, would also target "roving wiretaps."

In a campaign-style offensive at stops around the country, Ashcroft is warning against tampering with this provision. He says "roving wiretaps" mean that prosecutors no longer must get permission for different wiretaps every time a suspect changes cell phones. Instead, the wiretap authority applies to the suspect rather than a specific phone.

International terrorists are trained to thwart surveillance by rapidly changing locations and communications devices, according to Ashcroft, who says, "We have used these tools to provide security and ensure liberty."

Is Big Brother Reading Over Your Shoulder?

Murkowski's bill raises the standard for the government to look at medical records, library records or records involving the purchase or rental of books, videos and music.

Ashcroft says the government has no interest in what ordinary Americans choose to read. However, if terrorist suspects are using the library to determine how to make explosives, it becomes very much the business of government.

By the same token, say supporters of the Patriot Act, buying fertilizer is perfectly legal. But if it is acquired as a component for making a bomb, it is no longer an innocent act.

The fact that American Civil Liberties Union and other leftist-dominated groups are sounding the alarm on the Patriot Act has strengthened the tendency of some conservatives to defend it. But could that very law come back to bite those who now support it? We will deal with that in our next installment.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:

Bush Administration

Homeland/Civil Defense

Privacy

War on Terrorism

Editor's note:
Have an Opinion About This? Click Here to Send an URGENT PriorityGram Today