Fix the PATRIOT Act

Congress has one last chance to fix the PATRIOT Act, and the crucial vote is coming up soon. With your help, Russ collected thousands of signatures and convinced the Senate to pass a modified version of the act that would remove some of the worst infringements on our rights and freedoms. Now we need to make sure the Senate version is the one that becomes law.

Also currently nurturing the spirit of our heritage of independence and privacy is Steven Lilienthal, director of the Center for Privacy and Technology Policy at the Free Congress Foundation. He regularly sends me valuable news of present and prospective violations of privacy by government and other entities.

Writing in support of "constant review" of Patriot Act powers, Mr. Lilienthal emphasizes: "Many conservatives understand full well how future policymakers can take laws intended for an important reason -- combating terrorism -- and try applying those powers to other areas. Not only should the existing sunsets (clauses in the Patriot Act) be retained, they should be added to such far-reaching powers as the Section 213 delayed notification searches ('sneak and peek') that short-circuit the Fourth Amendment because (those powers) extend well beyond fighting terrorism." The Justice Department recently conceded that 88 percent of Section 213 search warrants have been executed in non-terrorism cases.

By Russ Feingold and John Sununu | November 9, 2005

We will make every effort -- and, if we have to, use procedural options at our disposal -- to oppose a final reauthorization bill that either strips out the meaningful changes made by the Senate bill or adds measures that ignore the public demands for more protection of our rights and freedoms. Our goal is not to derail reauthorization; it is to ensure that necessary changes to the Patriot Act are made as part of the reauthorization bill. We can -- and should -- provide law enforcement with the tools necessary to fight terrorism while protecting civil liberties at home.

The federal government is spending an increasing amount of money on surveillance technology and programs at the expense of other projects. EPIC's "Spotlight on Surveillance" project scrutinizes these surveillance programs. For more information, see previous Spotlights on Surveillance.¹

IN THE PAST FEW weeks there have been two significant disclosures concerning the rules that govern domestic spying, just as the House and the Senate are preparing to reconcile versions of a bill to reauthorize key provisions of the USA Patriot Act. The first was a release by the FBI of internal reports documenting violations of the rules of domestic surveillance in national security cases. The second was a story by Post staff writer Barton Gellman revealing that the number of "national security letters" -- a kind of administrative subpoena used by the FBI to obtain normally private records -- has exploded since the passage of the Patriot Act and now reaches 30,000 per year. These reports open a timely window onto the question that animates the debate over the Patriot Act: How responsibly is the government using its spying powers? Though they don't provide a complete answer, the new disclosures are troubling.