The ORWELLIAN CIRCUS hits the road
Bush Administration Plans Defense of Terror Law
August 19, 2003
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
WASHINGTON, Aug. 18 - The Bush administration, under
increasing criticism over its terrorism policies, is
beginning an unusual counteroffensive this week in an
effort to shore up support for the prized legislation that
grew out of the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.
The pitchman for the campaign-style initiative is Attorney
General John Ashcroft, a politically divisive figure who
plans to deliver more than a dozen speeches around the
country beginning on Tuesday in defense of the
administration's terrorism efforts.
The campaign will take Mr. Ashcroft to states that are
considered central to Mr. Bush's 2004 re-election effort
and where some political strategists say the
administration's tough antiterrorism tactics play well.
The USA Patriot Act, as the sweeping legislation passed
after 9/11 is known, has formed a cornerstone of the
administration's antiterrorism policies in giving law
enforcement agents expanded powers to identify, track and
apprehend suspects.
But the legislation has also become almost a dirty word in
some circles in recent months. The Republican-led House
voted overwhelmingly last month to repeal a key provision
on the use of surveillance, 152 communities have passed
resolutions objecting to the legislation because of what
some saw as its Big Brother overtones, and civil liberties
groups are suing to have parts of the law struck down as
unconstitutional.
The increasingly vitriolic concerns over the measure and
its future have thrown the administration on the defensive,
according to people close to the administration. Mr.
Ashcroft, though often criticized by liberal and
conservative policy-makers, is seeking to solidify support
for the law.
"The administration realizes that Ashcroft is a bit of a
lightning rod," said a prominent Republican consultant. "He
has his down sides, but not in the realm of prosecuting
terrorism and protecting national security. He works well
in that area."
Over the next month the attorney general will promote the
law as an effective tool against terrorism before law
enforcement organizations, and conservative groups in such
states as Iowa, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Ohio. Two of the
cities where the talks will be held later this week,
Philadelphia and Detroit, have passed resolutions opposing
the act. But Justice Department officials said political
calculations did not factor into the attorney general's
itinerary.
"The majority of American people are clearly supportive of
our counterterrorism efforts, including the use of the
Patriot Act," said Mark Corallo, a department spokesman.
"It's important that after months of misinformation being
spread by a small but vocal minority inside the Beltway
that we go out beyond Washington and talk to people in law
enforcement and let them know that their efforts are
appreciated."
Viet Dinh, a former Justice Department official who drafted
the Patriot Act, said that Mr. Ashcroft's agenda would be
"to correct the misperceptions that are out there and to
disabuse the American public of the misinformation they've
gotten."
The themes will be similar to those that Mr. Ashcroft and
top aides have voiced for months - that the Patriot Act is
essential to fight terrorism and that critics have
distorted what the law does to make it seem more onerous
than it really is. But the heightened pitch of his message
underscores the urgency of a political debate that many
Republicans and Democrats say they think the administration
is losing.
Representative C. L. Otter, Republican of Idaho, who
sponsored last month's amendment in the House repealing a
surveillance power in the Patriot Act, said in an interview
today that he viewed the campaign by Mr. Ashcroft as an
effort "to try to reclaim the ground that the Justice
Department has lost."
Mr. Otter, who voted against the act in October 2001, said
he thought it was a mistake for Congress to move ahead with
it just weeks after the 9/11 attacks at the
administration's urging. The legislation gave law
enforcement agents dozens of new tools for wiretapping and
following terrorism suspects and probing their financial
and personal records, and it made it easier for law
enforcement and intelligence officials to share information
they obtained in their inquiries.
"The smoke was still coming out of the rubble in New York
City when we passed the law," Mr. Otter said. "I think
there's a sense in Congress now that maybe we moved too far
too fast."
David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union,
agreed.
"Among conservatives, more and more people are saying that
the Patriot Act oversteps the powers that government
needs," Mr. Keene said. "The mood in Congress has clearly
changed since the law was passed after 9/11, and I think
the attorney general is trying to reverse that trend."
The debate over balancing counterterrorism demands against
civil liberties has shaped issues including law enforcement
budgets and the government's ability to monitor people's
reading habits, and it will become even more pressing as
the expiration of some parts of Patriot Act nears in 2005.
Some Republican Congressional leaders have hinted that
they want to introduce legislation expanding powers granted
under the act. They have also sought to extend the life of
the law by removing the so-called sunset provisions, only
to be beaten back by concerns from civil libertarians in
Congress who say the legislation needs greater scrutiny.
Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the ranking Democrat
on the Judiciary Committee, said today that only by backing
away from efforts to repeal the sunset provisions and
giving Congress more complete information could Mr.
Ashcroft "begin repairing the unease" over the Patriot Act.
Both Democrats and Republicans said that Mr. Ashcroft could
prove either an asset or a liability for the administration
in pushing greater acceptance of the measure. His stance on
social issues appeals to what Laura Murphy, director of the
Washington office of the American Civil Liberties Union,
called "the hard-core, right-wing, rabble-rousing base."
But he has also proved to be a lightning rod for criticism
in part because of what critics see as his confrontational
approach and his conservative politics.
Mr. Ashcroft has angered some lawmakers by suggesting that
critics who raised civil liberties concerns were soft on
terrorism, and he urged prosecutors last year not to shrink
from their duties in the face of "slings and arrows in the
public arena."
But even some of his critics say that Justice Department
officials appear to have become more responsive to their
concerns about the civil liberties implications of the
Patriot Act and their repeated demands for information on
how it is being used.
"People are still concerned, but at least they've finally
gotten around to giving us some actual answers," said a
Republican Congressional aide. "The suspicions have come
when they refused to provide answers. That's when people
think they must have something to hide."
nytimes.com
CC |
