The U.S. House of Representatives Wednesday voted to extend the USA Patriot Act until March 10. The Senate is expected to follow suit, perhaps as early as today.
This extension of the existing law allows time to balance the needs of law enforcement in the war on terrorism with the paramount importance of protecting Americans’ civil liberties.
Four years ago, Congress passed the Patriot Act to give law enforcement agencies broad new tools to fight terrorists. Among other things, it gave government expanded power to search business, library, phone and other personal records. The absence of limitations on these powers has rightly caused many Americans – Democrats, Republicans, and independents – to be concerned about the law’s impact on their basic civil liberties and their fundamental right to privacy.
Knowing that they were operating in the highly charged emotional atmosphere following the attacks of Sept. 11 and that some of the new powers were untested and controversial, Congress included a provision to sunset 16 of the act’s most controversial provisions at the end of 2005 to allow for review, revision and renewal. With that in mind, early last year I began working with Republican Sens. Larry Craig, John Sununu and Lisa Murkowski, and with Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin and Russ Feingold to write legislation that would reauthorize all of the Patriot Act’s expiring provisions, while preventing the government from infringing on the privacy rights of innocent Americans. We introduced that measure – the Security and Freedom Enhancement (SAFE) Act – in March, and began working with our colleagues in the House and Senate to incorporate its provisions into broader legislation to renew the Patriot Act.
That process was long and difficult, but our efforts paid off. In July, in a rare display of bipartisanship that reflected a fair and thorough negotiation, the Senate unanimously approved a measure to reauthorize the Patriot Act’s provisions, and to safeguard our rights and freedoms. That bill did not contain everything that was in the bipartisan SAFE Act, but it reflected a genuine effort to strike an appropriate balance, and passed with the support of all 100 senators.
The only remaining task was to reconcile differences between the bipartisan Senate bill and the version passed by the House. Unfortunately, the legislation that resulted from negotiations between the two bodies failed to achieve the balance so important to the Senate bill’s success. I again joined the bipartisan SAFE Act coalition, this time to identify a handful of critical issues that would have to be addressed to earn our support. Again, we did not ask for everything we wanted. Our most serious concerns included:
Records searches: Section 215 of the original Patriot Act allowed the government to search broad categories of records – including business, personal and library records – in relation to a terrorist investigation, but without having to show that the records have at least some connection to a suspected terrorist. In order to protect innocent Americans from government intrusion, we believe the government should be required to demonstrate such a connection.
Judicial review of gag orders: Under the Patriot Act, recipients of both section 215 search orders and National Security Letters (which the FBI can issue without a court order to obtain certain narrow categories of records) are prohibited from disclosing anything about the matter, and from effectively challenging that gag order in court. We believe that recipients of 215 orders and NSLs are entitled to meaningful judicial review of the gag order.
Sunset provisions: While we are pleased that many of the act’s most controversial provisions will expire in another four years to give Congress an opportunity to review and revise them, the final reauthorization proposal did not include a sunset provision for National Security Letters. In recent months, very serious concerns have come to light about the potential abuse of NSL authority by the government. This authority should be included with the other controversial provisions that expire in 2010 so that Congress is sure to take another look at this sensitive issue.
Coloradans, and all Americans, understand that the security they deserve and the liberties they cherish are not mutually exclusive ideals. They also understand that, on an issue as important as national security, it is imperative that our nation’s leaders work together. I share those beliefs, and remain hopeful that the Congress will strike the right balance.
Ken Salazar is the junior U.S. Senator from Colorado.
