Patriot Act Redux

During his campaign for the presidency, Barack Obama, touting his background as a professor who taught Constitutional Law, often waxed eloquent about his commitment to civil liberties and to correcting the Patriot Act's threats to basic constitutional protections.

It was part of his stump speech on the campaign trail. And in one of the presidential debates he said "I like to think that had I been in the Senate [in 2001], I would have [voted] against the Patriot Act."

And so, it might have been expected that when the Democratic-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee began consideration, last week, of whether or not to renew some of the more controversial provisions of the Patriot Act, they would have made an effort to fulfill the president's campaign promise. And that the White House would have weighed in, in favor of reform.

Three sections of the Act (the so-called "library provision", the use of roving wiretaps, and the "lone wolf" provision) are due to expire, at years end, and this, therefore, was the time to either let them expire or, as the New York Times advocated "add missing civil liberties and privacy protections, address known abuses and trim excesses."

Of particular concern to civil libertarians was the fact that the three sections of the Patriot Act in question have allowed law enforcement to wire tap and to seize the records of businesses, institutions (including libraries), and individuals without judicial review or oversight and without ever establishing evidence of suspected terrorist activity.

Civil libertarians of the right and left urged the Senate not to reauthorize the three provisions without providing new restraints on law enforcement and adequate protections, ensuring that rights be safeguarded. Alas, the Committee voted last week, with the White House's blessing, to send to the full Senate, for its consideration, a reauthorized Patriot Act largely intact.

(watch Bill Press discussing the Patriot Act on "Viewpoint with James Zogby")

...But Not Without Some Comic Relief

The debate within the Committee had one comic (or tragic) moment. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) attempted to amend the proposed Patriot Act reauthorization with a provision that would have required law enforcement to demonstrate a terrorist connection before they could use the Act's sweeping powers to wiretap or seize records.

In arguing against Senator Durbin's effort, Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) said that his amendment was unnecessary since she felt that the bill, as proposed, already included protection enough. To make her case, she then went on to read aloud what she thought was the bill she favored, concluding triumphantly that what she had read provided adequate safeguards.

All well and good, except as Senator Durbin then pointed out, "you just read my amendment."

Unabashed, Klobuchar voted against the Durbin amendment that she had just read aloud and praised.

And this is how our laws are made!

Comments

[rughead23]

Really ashame the Patriot Act had to go in house after 911, profiling must be off the charts while some are just using the internet for information or tasks like music therapy.

[anitaj]

Getting rid of the "Patriot Act" part of the change that Americans voted for.

President Obama should get moving on that.

[MerhabaAbi]

Do not correct the Patriot Act. Re-write it in it's entirety to reflect the values extablished in the first 10 amendments to our national constitution.

[WeMustSpeakOut]

Excellent concept!

[AmericanDreamWarrior]

When Obama went back on his promises that he was going to over turn the worst of Cheneys anti citizen/anti human "laws" he broke faith with every person that voted for him based on hope for change. Where's the difference? He may feel secure in the fact that most of us will not hold our noses to spite him and vote republican because that would be spiting ourselves as well. But what Obama and every other democrat that doesn't uphold our constitution and acts no better then republicans needs to realize, we no longer want to have only two choices, evil and lesser evil. Evil is just that regardless of the letter next to their name.

If there was ever time for a third and even fourth party to come forward and level the playing field its now. And the DNR's can no longer take comfort that their smug efforts to lock out third parties from the national debate is going to continue to work, the internet has leveled that playing field!

Bush was responsible for the ruination of all things that Americans held dear and that's historical fact and no amount of spin is going to change that. If Obama isn't careful, he may be responsible for a reverse Ellis Island, a mass exodus of people that don't want to live in a faux democracy (police state). How will he feel when history judges him just as poorly?

[WeMustSpeakOut]

You are right ADW, and from what I have read emigration from America continues to rise yearly.

[hayduke lives]

The sad facts about Obama's disdain for human rights:

1) Renditions are still legal and occurring. People are being taken from their homes, spirited away in the night to foreign countries, where they are tortured and abused, allegedly to keep America safe from terrorism.

2) The National Security Agency continues to collect all electronic data on US citizens, every email and telephone call is recorded and mined for data daily. So much data is collected, that the NSA is currently building two stadium-size facilities to house the data, one in San Antonio, Texas, the other just outside Salt Lake City, Utah.

3) The US continues to hold nearly 1,000 humans in custody at Bagrham Air Base in Afghanistan, and at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Most outside the administration agree these people deserve fair trials by civilian courts, not military tribunals, because most are likely not guilty of anything but being dark skinned with non-English names.

4) Obama continues to assert that some detained humans will be held forever without trail because they are simply too dangerous to allow to go free, even if they are found not guilty in civilian court. Holding humans without due process, regardless of US citizenship or protection by the Constitution, is a crime and should be punished as such.

I'm sick of all the mindless Obama supporters ("He's just getting warmed up!", or, "At least he's not Bush!") rejecting these appropriate and necessary criticisms of the president's approach to freedom and justice.

[OliverTwist]

You are correct. The President needs to be criticized for his support of injustice and his defense of criminals.

[WeMustSpeakOut]

Yes he should be criticized loudly and clearly!

The sooner people get over the fact that we were duped by a nearly flawless campaign, the sooner we all pay attention to the quantifiable actions of our President; many of which are the exact opposite of what we desperately need to happen!

[werbenjagermanjensen]

And you'll notice, not a peep out of the Teabaggers, the Dittoheads, the Libertarians, or the Michigan Militia.

[WorldofTomorrow420]

All the comments listed here stating that the Patriot Act violates the Fourth Amendment....hey, don't worry about that pesky little amendment, we have it on the authority of none other than the ex-CIA chief Michael Hayden that "the Fourth Amendment actually protects all of us against unreasonable search and seizure."
QUESTION: "But the measure is probable cause, I believe."

GEN. HAYDEN: "The amendment says unreasonable search and seizure."

QUESTION: "But does it not say probable --"

GEN. HAYDEN: "No. The amendment says unreasonable search and seizure."

See?

[alexa07]

"The debate within the Committee had one comic (or tragic) moment. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) attempted to amend the proposed Patriot Act reauthorization with a provision that would have required law enforcement to demonstrate a terrorist connection before they could use the Act's sweeping powers to wiretap or seize records.
"All well and good, except as Senator Durbin then pointed out, "you just read my amendment."
Unabashed, Klobuchar voted against the Durbin amendment that she had just read aloud and praised.
And this is how our laws are made."

Comic & tragic. Yes, Senator Durbin is to be commended, not so Klobuchar. It is, in fact, very disappointing that the Obama people have not lived up to many of their campaign promises.

[dim]

Amy Klobuchar, you make me sad. I bet you sleep like a baby at night, too.

[williamwilliam]

IrishMale

I just can't understand why Patriot Act hasn't already been overturned? It's in clear violation of the 4th Amendment. It's indefensible.
----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­-------

Your confusion, I think, may be rooted in the idea that this country is still a functioning
democratic republic.

A democratic republic, as was the case with the former United States, depends on at
least three things in order to function:

1. Independent Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches un-beholden to
moneyed special interests.
2. A robust, diverse, and reasonably competent fourth estate that is in sum un-beholden to the
state and to moneyed special interests.
3. A moderately educated and informed citizenry.

Last time I checked, we're 0 for 3-

-Under such circumstances, why would anyone expect 'The Patriot' Act to be overturned.

[AmericanDreamWarrior]

WELL SAID!

[rf dude]

The Constitution - a great idea in abstract, but in practice much too easily subverted by the very government it was intended to control...

[rf dude]

Now Utica got it right...

[TruthJusticeForAll]

Was not so easy, took 214 years & George W. Shrub.

[glockman]

This is a huge part of the problem. You really think Pres. Bush is the only one responsible for shredding the constitution?

Pick up a history book, or two, and read them. Presidents throughout history, including Obama, have been ignoring and circumventing the document since its inception. Some even worse than Bush.

[twofish]

I figured something was up when we got news of the arrests of terrorists in the last few weeks -- really, truly this time, not clowns who want Al Qaeda to buy them cool boots. Time to be afwaid again! Timing is everything, isn't it?

[WeMustSpeakOut]

Yep. The Bu$h/Cheney playbook continues to be followed to the letter - different face/s, same policies and scare tactics.

[pmorlan]

Glenn Greenwald recently wrote an excellent piece about Obama using Bush fear mongering tactics to justify not changing the Patriot Act. The more things change, the more they remain the same.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/10/06/obama/index.html

[glockman]

Greenwald needs to run for president. But then, he would probably lose because he's not popular or "Hollywood" enough to garner votes from a stupid populace.

[BandsofBlack]

He'd have my vote.

[deezus]

They should have just let the provisions expire according to the sunset clause at the end of 2005. They set an expiration date for a reason...

[IrishMale]

I just can't understand why Patriot Act hasn't already been overturned? It's in clear violation of the 4th Amendment. It's indefensible. It would represent huge political capital for Obama. Credibility to spare.

Maybe that's it. He's got people on his side right now, so maybe he's holding Patriot Act and DOMA as ace cards to restore his cred if it gets damaged by, say, handing billions of taxpayer dollars to Wall Street in return for nothing, or passing a health care bill that accomplishes nothing he promised.

[Adartist777]

4th Amendment? What's that? Oh yes, I remember now...the search and seizure law. That used to be good constitutional right to have years ago. Now, you get pulled over and searched for no probable cause. Our children get strip searched in school. 4th Amendment. What a novel idea. Too bad it no longer exists in Amerika.