http://www.house.gov/harman/press/releases/2005/0713PR_Patriot%20Act.htmlJuly 13, 2005
HARMAN ON PATRIOT ACT: MEND IT, DON'T END IT
WASHINGTON D.C.- Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee, today delivered the following opening statement during the full committee markup of the Patriot Act Reauthorization Bill:
"Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let's start on common ground, where we can all agree.
"First, we need strong tools to combat terrorism. The terrorist threat is real - and if we are going to demand that the FBI to uncover terror cells here in the U.S., we need to give them the tools to do that.
"Second, the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 and who attacked London on 7/7 hate our free society and our cherished civil liberties. They believe that our commitment to the rule of law and to open, limited government is a façade, and that our promises of freedom are empty. But they are not. They are our bedrock values; without them, we would not be Americans.
"The last time this Committee considered the PATRIOT Act, it was also in the shadow of terrorism. It was just 45 days after 9/11; we were bracing for more terror; the invasion of Afghanistan had begun; and Capitol Hill was hit with anthrax attacks. Given these intense pressures, Congress did a fairly decent job with the PATRIOT Act, which modernized several legal authorities and gave the FBI new tools to track terrorists here at home. I voted for the bill, not because it was perfect but because it was a solid start, and because these new tools were needed.
"Today, we have a chance to improve the PATRIOT Act. As Deputy Attorney General Jim Comey told our Committee when he briefed us, any expansion of government power must be carefully justified and tailored so that it does not facilitate abuse or unwarranted intrusions into our privacy.
"For that reason, I am a cosponsor of the bipartisan SAFE Act, which had 71 cosponsors in the last Congress. I also voted for the Sanders Amendment, which passed 238-187, with a large number of Republican votes. The Sanders Amendment prohibited spending funds in the CJS appropriations bill to obtain library or bookstore documentary records, but properly excluded internet records because we know that terrorists have used the internet. This was an important improvement to the original Act - one that both Democrats and Republicans endorsed.
"Like the original PATRIOT Act, the legislation introduced by Mr. Sensenbrenner is a good start. For example, it would allow the recipients of 215 orders to consult with an attorney and challenge the order before a federal judge. This bill also excluded some of the dangerous provisions that our counterparts in the Senate adopted, including Administrative subpoenas, mail covers, and an expansion of the definition of foreign intelligence. I want to give credit where credit is due - and I want to thank Chairman Hoekstra for forwarding our recommendations onto to Mr. Sensenbrenner.
"But this bill can be improved … significantly. For that reason, we intend to offer a small package of Amendments, which we have shared with the Chairman. These Amendments were developed with input from a range of Members and outside groups. I personally shared these ideas Attorney General Gonzales and Director Mueller. Our staffs have discussed them on a bipartisan basis. And these specific amendments have been endorsed by the Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances - a coalition led by a range of people from Congressman Bob Barr to the ACLU.
"Let me briefly describe these amendments. They would:
1. Require that the government provide facts to the FISA Court to explain exactly how the business records it seeks or the phones or computers it wants to tap relate to a foreign power or agent of a foreign power, which is the traditional FISA standard. The Sensenbrenner bill merely requires the government to state that the records are "relevant" to an international terrorism investigation - a standard that requires no explanation and no facts.
2. Prohibit 215 Orders from being used for library or bookstore documentary records. This is consistent with the Sanders Amendment. These records can still be obtained via subpoenas or search warrants, and this amendment would not change the authority to obtain internet records.
3. Require that roving John Doe wiretaps - an extremely broad authority - include a description of the target and a time-limit to ensure that the target is near the phone or computer he may use. This will eliminate the potential that the government will be able to conduct secret wiretapping of large numbers of innocent Americans.
4. Allow for a criminal defendant who is prosecuted with FISA material to be given summaries of that material, without disclosing sources and methods … only summaries … just as the government does with other classified information. And if the target of a FISA search turns out not to be an agent of a foreign power, like the Oregon lawyer Brandon Mayfield who was wrongly jailed because of a fingerprint mismatch in the Madrid investigation, then the government would have to tell that person that the government had secretly searched his home or tapped his phones.
5. Finally, we propose extending the sunset of the Lone Wolf provision in to 2008, to make it consistent with the 4-year sunsets in the original PATRIOT Act.
"These proposals are moderate. They have bipartisan support. And they will not compromise the ability to catch terrorists or spies. They will merely adjust the authorities of the PATRIOT Act to preserve our liberties.
"Our liberties are our crown jewels. Let's stand together to defend them."
###
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
