Praise be for those APPLAUDING AGAINST FASICSM in the face of Bush during the state of the union STUMP SPEECH
The Politics of Security
January 27, 2004
President Bush is making an oddly timed push for renewal of
the Patriot Act. Since important provisions of the law do
not expire until the end of 2005, his real reason for
raising the issue last week in his State of the Union
address seemed to be political: to create the appearance of
being tough on terrorism, which is central to his
re-election campaign, while undercutting the chorus of
critics, spanning the political spectrum, who are calling
the act a threat to civil liberties. Mr. Bush had it
exactly backward. Rather than rushing to renew the law,
Congress should curtail its many serious excesses.
Even Senator Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican, said the
renewal request was "about a year early." He joined an
array of Republicans - including Newt Gingrich, the former
speaker of the House of Representatives, and Senator Larry
Craig of Idaho - and many more Democrats in expressing
concern about the act's effect on ordinary Americans.
Mr. Bush suggested that the Patriot Act simply gave law
enforcement the same kind of powers to go after terrorists
that it already has for ordinary criminals. But it actually
expands the government's ability to monitor people in
important ways. Section 215, which has provoked
considerable opposition, allows the F.B.I. to order third
parties, like libraries or Internet service providers, to
hand over personal records about individuals. Librarians
and other record holders can be arrested if they make a
request public, or notify the target.
Other sections expand the government's power to conduct
secret searches and wiretaps. A clear indication that the
Patriot Act has expanded the government's investigative
authority is that Mr. Bush's own Justice Department found
in a study last fall that the act is regularly being used
in nonterrorism cases. Defenders of the act say there is
little evidence it is being misused. But if individuals'
rights are violated, they may have no way to know that.
A federal judge has just struck down, as unconstitutionally
vague, the act's ban on giving advice and assistance to
groups designated as foreign terrorist organizations. But
the act is not merely constitutionally suspect. There are
better ways to make the country safe: inspect more of the
shipping containers coming into United States ports,
increase security around nuclear and chemical plants, and
buy up enriched uranium before it falls into the wrong
hands. But the money to do such things is in short supply
after the president's tax cuts. Taking away civil liberties
may not expand Mr. Bush's gaping budget deficit, but its
price in lost freedom is more than we can afford.
nytimes.com |
