home

Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming

By Jeralyn, Section Legislation
Posted on Wed May 25, 2005 at 05:22:06 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The Senate Intelligence Committee held a hearing Tuesday on expanding the Patriot Act. The vote will be Thursday, during a secret hearing. The ACLU outlines the provisions of the bill under consideration:

The bill would grant so-called "administrative subpoena" authority to the FBI, letting the bureau write and approve its own search orders for any tangible thing it deems relevant to an intelligence investigation without approval. This power would let agents seize personal records from medical facilities, libraries, hotels, gun dealers, banks and any other business, without having to appear before a judge, and without any evidence that the people whose records are swept in are involved in any criminal activity.

The proposal would also give the FBI broad new powers to track people’s mail in intelligence inquiries. It would force postal workers to disclose the name, address and other information appearing on envelopes delivered to or from people designated by the FBI, without any meaningful protections.

The bill would permit secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act searches and surveillance for the sole purpose of criminal prosecution for certain crimes, such as terrorism and espionage, allowing searches to proceed without following the requirements of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. FISA searches were designed to be used a tool in intelligence gathering investigations, so they are held to lower evidentiary standards than criminal investigations.

First off, it should be an open hearing. Democracy dies behind closed doors. Second, these powers should not be granted. They are an end run around the Fourth Amendment. As the ACLU says,

"If adopted, these broad new powers would sidestep time-honored checks and balances. Lawmakers should hold an open process, and reject this reckless disregard for the Fourth Amendment, which protects the liberty and privacy of all Americans."

< Trial Begins in Abu Ghraib Death | The 'Second Chance Act': A Plan to Help Ex-Offenders >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming | 11 comments (11 topical)
    Re: Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming (none / 0) (#4)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:52:56 PM EST
    The sheeple have to have their American Idol while their right to privacy is stolen out from under their noses.

    Re: Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming (none / 0) (#5)
    by Lora on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:52:56 PM EST
    You think any of "our" Senators will listen this time? Wonder why it isn't in the press? Part of the Grand Plan. Conspiracy theory? Hey, if the foo s#!ts, wear it.

    Re: Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming (none / 0) (#1)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:54:19 PM EST
    Add "patriot" to "freedom" and "democracy" in the list of words that have been pistol-whipped, raped, and left for dead by Bush and his filthy Neocon gangster brethren.

    Re: Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming (none / 0) (#2)
    by SeeEmDee on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:54:19 PM EST
    Well, there's something in this to piss off everyone now. Looks like it's time to get on the horn to your Senators and remind them there's several hundred million people in America who already think the majority of them are dangerous fools. This kind of idiocy will only confirm to the less stable of our population that their worst suspicions have been confirmed.

    Re: Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming (none / 0) (#3)
    by The Heretik on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:54:20 PM EST
    It's simply amazing this isn't getting more press. Every thing is as much under the radar as possible. Way to stay on it, J. More on this with links to contact Intelligence committee Senators here: Red, White and Very Blue: The Patriot Act in Review

    Re: Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming (none / 0) (#6)
    by wg on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:19 PM EST
    What they want this time are new subpoena powers for the FBI and allied agencies, again without any judicial oversight, nominal or otherwise. The rationale? We want to codify what is already a standard practice. (We notice only half in jest that slavery was a standard practice too so maybe we should codify it too.) Seriously, giving the FBI the right to demand willy-nilly any information from anybody (your doctor, your utility, your grocer, librarian, bank, ISP provider, school, employer, etc) is risky even when such orders are subject to prior judicial review. The danger inherent in the present proposal, which is no judicial review at any point , is impossible to overerestimate. -- Assuming that somebody in Congress wakes up, smells the rat and starts to demand some explanation here is a likely scenario. They (i.e. the FBI, DHS, Gonzales, their promoters in Congress, etc) will claim that judicial review is not practicable because : a) there are not enough judges in the country to provide timely review of such orders, (not true, we have far more judges per capita than most other countries France, Germany, even Britain. 35 thousand plus which should be plenty enough.) b) in some cases immediate action will be required. Having to wait for judicial approval could seriously compromise national security. (bs, this situation has been considered before and proper mechanisms are in place. In FISA cases (originally spys and terror cases now it could be jaywalking), two specially selected judges are available 24/7/365. Similar arrangements are in place locally, every judicial jurisdiction in this country has a 24hr number for urgent warrant approvals.) c) the reality is that warrants are approved automatically, judges rarely deny them. Why waste their and our time for what is, de facto, a meaningless exercise?) (true, most judges approve warrants w/o much thought or scrutiny, however even if only one case in thousands of abusive warrants issued annually get caught, the judicial review requirement is worth its weight in gold. ) d) we are a professional organization, subjecting us to external oversight impugns our integrity, undermines our public image and compromises our effectiveness. (I don't think they will be stupid enough to advance this argument) -- Let's face it, when they demand new massively invasive police powers and think they can get them w/o any judicial oversight we already lost. National security state in making, Mielke could only dream about, imho.

    Re: Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming (none / 0) (#7)
    by Aaron on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:19 PM EST
    Historically all we need look at is the Roman Empire to see the model for the dissolution of the Republic. Each step follows invariably to the next, until we reach that dividing line between democracy and theocracy. Leaders who seize absolute executive power are nearly always motivated by divine inspiration. George W. Bush is one who has mentioned his predetermined divine destiny. While most believe that such profound change in our country is rather far-fetched, consider the consequences of a 21st-century man-made calamity, such as a nuclear device being detonated in a major US city like New York, Chicago or Los Angeles. Three to five million people would immediately be killed, and undoubtedly martial law would be declared permanently. Imagine what will happen to civil liberties under those circumstances. How long will the Republic endure such a conflagration. From this point what we'll be left with is Machiavellian leaders/dictators doing what's best for all, and they alone will determine what that is. This is the inevitable culmination of the neocon philosophy, as well as falling in nicely with the Christian evangelical interpretation of Revelations. Another philosophy George W. Bush is an inherent to.

    Re: Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:19 PM EST
    Aaron, if the situation you describe would come to pass, with our current "leadership", our Democratic Republic would likely be permenantly dead within the hour. Those that would destroy this nation would be handed their victory in the legislation that would surely follow. Just my opinion.

    Re: Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming (none / 0) (#9)
    by Aaron on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:19 PM EST
    Ernesto Del Mundo You make an interesting point about the use of language by the Right. "The Patriot Act, The Healthy Forests Initiative, No Child Left Behind etc". Regardless of the fact that these initiatives are seemingly the antithesis of what they state, simply choosing a name that has a visceral appeal, and repeating it over and over again has been one of the most successful political tactics of the Bush administration and the right-wing. Carl Rove must have taken some classical rhetoric classes.

    Re: Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming (none / 0) (#10)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:20 PM EST
    Aaron...indeed, they love defacing perfectly nice words. To the point that it seems to be some kind of fetishistic game. It reminds me of when I was in the military and the officers would throw the word "integrity" out there in every other sentence until it meant nothing more than "this is one of those corporate-speak words that you use to prove how good you are at sucking up and jumping through hoops in order to move up the chain of command". But the classic example of this is the Patriot Act. What kind of patriot seeks to blow a series of buckshot holes through the Constitution? As you hinted at, their pollution industry lobbyist-written environmental bills are also hideous antonyms for what they really represent. If only truth in advertising laws could be applied to these creeps.

    Re: Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming (none / 0) (#11)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:20 PM EST
    It's classic newspeak fellas, I'm glad I'm not the only one who notices. Orwell is the Nostradamus (Sp?) of the 20th century.

    Patriot Act Expansion Vote Coming | 11 comments (11 topical)