Republicans Want Terror Law Made Permanent

Graphicd00d

Senior member
Aug 10, 2001
293
0
0
We must stop this!!!! Call your representatives now!!! Don't let Hatch destroy freedom!

NY Times

Republicans Want Terror Law Made Permanent
By ERIC LICHTBLAU


WASHINGTON, April 8 ? Working with the Bush administration, Congressional Republicans are maneuvering to make permanent the sweeping antiterrorism powers granted to federal law enforcement agents after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, officials said today.

The move is likely to touch off strong objections from many Democrats and even some Republicans in Congress who believe that the Patriot Act, as the legislation that grew out of the attacks is known, has already given the government too much power to spy on Americans.

The landmark legislation expanded the government's power to use eavesdropping, surveillance, access to financial and computer records and other tools to track terrorist suspects.

When it passed in October 2001, moderates and civil libertarians in Congress agreed to support it only by making many critical provisions temporary. Those provisions will expire, or "sunset," at the end of 2005 unless Congress re-authorizes them.

But Republicans in the Senate in recent days have discussed a proposal, written by Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, that would repeal the sunset provisions and make the law's new powers permanent, officials said. Republicans may seek to move on the proposal this week by trying to attaching it to another antiterrorism bill that would make it easier for the government to use secret surveillance warrants against "lone wolf" terrorism suspects.

Many Democrats have grown increasingly frustrated by what they see as a lack of information from the Justice Department on how its agents are using their newfound powers, and they say they need more time to determine whether agents are abusing those powers.

The Senate Democratic leader, Tom Daschle of South Dakota, said today that without extensive review, he "would be very strongly opposed to any repeal" of the 2005 time limit. He predicted that Republicans lacked the votes to repeal the limits.

Indeed, Congressional officials and political observers said the debate might force lawmakers to take stock of how far they were willing to sacrifice civil liberties in the name of fighting terrorism.

Beryl Howell, a former Democratic aide in the Senate who worked extensively on the 2001 legislation, said that by forcing the issue, Mr. Hatch "is throwing down the gauntlet to people who think the U.S.A. Patriot Act went too far and who want to cut back its powers."

Justice Department officials in interviews today credited the Patriot Act with allowing the F.B.I. to move with greater speed and flexibility to disrupt terrorist operations before they occur, and they say they wanted to see the 2005 time limit on the legislation lifted.

"The Patriot Act has been an extremely useful tool, a demonstrated success, and we don't want that to expire on us," a senior department official said on condition of anonymity.

Another senior official who also demanded anonymity said the department had held discussions with Congressional Republicans about how that might best be accomplished. "Our involvement has really been just keeping an open ear to the issue as it's proceeding, not to really guide the debate," the official said.

With the act's provisions not set to expire for more than two and a half years, officials expected that the debate over its future would be many months away. But political jockeying over separate bipartisan legislation sponsored by Senators Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona, and Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, appears to have given Senator Hatch the chance to move on the issue much earlier than expected.

The Kyl-Schumer measure would eliminate the need for federal agents seeking secret surveillance warrants to show that a suspect is affiliated with a foreign power or agent, like a terrorist group.

Advocates say the measure would make it easier for agents to go after "lone wolf" terrorists who are not connected to a foreign group and might have allowed the F.B.I. to get a warrant against Zacarias Moussaoui, known as the 20th hijacker, before the Sept. 11 attacks.

The proposal was approved unanimously by the Senate Judiciary Committee. But Republicans are upset because several Democrats say that when the measure reaches the Senate floor for a full vote, perhaps this week or later in the month, they plan to offer amendments that would impose tougher restrictions on the use of secret warrants.

Among other proposals, Senator Russell D. Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, wants to add amendments that would require the Justice Department to give detailed information about how the secret warrants are being used and that could give defense lawyers access to some information generated by the warrants in criminal cases.

Republicans are countering with amendments of their own, including the idea of making the Patriot Act permanent.

Aides to Senator Hatch would not discuss his views on repealing the time limits in the law.

But an aide who demanded anonymity said of the "lone wolf" bill: "We support this bill as it is and that's how we want to see it passed. If the Democrats want to amend the bill, then we will offer an equal number of amendments to improve the bill as well. We hope the Democrats will stop holding this bill up."

Members of the Judiciary Committee, which Mr. Hatch leads, have been working in recent days to reach an agreement over the amendments that will be considered, officials said. But so far neither side appears willing to back down.

 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Well....Saddam is gone so there's a big threat gone, right? What's the need now? All we have to do is properly handover governing Iraq to the Iraqis (after helping them establish a new one) and then we pull the f*** out!
 

DanJ

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 1999
3,509
0
0
The thinking i'm sure now is that the world is paying attention to Iraq, they can sneak it through under the radar by attaching it to some BS anti-terror, anti-privacy law.
 

Kaervak

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2001
8,460
2
81
Well, this bloody wonderful. Let's treat everyone like criminals.
 

DanJ

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 1999
3,509
0
0
Originally posted by: Kaervak
Well, this bloody wonderful. Let's treat everyone like criminals.
Terrorists you mean. Let's treat everyone like terrorists..
 

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
25,107
9,492
136
I wouldn't mind if each piece of the Patriot Act were reviewed by Supreme Court, Congress etc. and certain parts of it made permament I guess...but making the whole thing permanent kinda scares me...
 

Graphicd00d

Senior member
Aug 10, 2001
293
0
0
Go to the ACLU Action page (free fax) and tell "them" you will not put up with these unconstitutional acts and then call their office and say the same thing. It's our Constitutional duty as American citizens to stand up to tyrants and their tyrannical deeds.
 

HappyPuppy

Lifer
Apr 5, 2001
16,997
2
71
Makes you wonder why the want to repeal the sunset clause, don't it? The "Patriot Act" should be reviewed every few years and modified as necessary. Nothing in it should ever be permanent. When it has served its purpose it should be filed permanently in the round file.

Let freedom ring!:D
 

Kaervak

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2001
8,460
2
81
Originally posted by: Graphicd00d
Go to the ACLU Action page (free fax) and tell "them" you will not put up with these unconstitutional acts and then call their office and say the same thing. It's our Constitutional duty as American citizens to stand up to tyrants and their tyrannical deeds.

Done and thanks for the link.
 

TommyVercetti

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2003
7,623
1
0
Signing in for the flame fest that is about to take place.

On one side we have ATers claiming "You don't have to scared if you are not doing anything wrong"
On the other side we have the ATers quoting Bejamin Franklins famous quout about security and freedom.

I will watch from the sidelines.
 

HOWITIS

Platinum Member
Apr 26, 2001
2,165
0
76
republican here, totally against these laws. what ever happaned to Republicans hating Big Gov? we're acting like Dems here.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
"Freedom First!" GW indeed! :| :| :|

Screw being scared or quoting Franklin, as an American I have the right to go about my lawful personal business without government intrusion or suspicion. Damn fascist big brother government Republicans! They're worse than the nanny-state socialist Democrats. :|
 

WinkOsmosis

Banned
Sep 18, 2002
13,990
1
0
Thank God I'm a Democrat. I can count on my representatives to fall in line behind the Republicans like the spineless pansies they are, and that's A-OK.
 

omega2

Member
Nov 2, 2002
116
0
0
I never liked the idea of having anyone having absolute power. As the saying goes, absolute power currupts.
 

DanJ

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 1999
3,509
0
0
Originally posted by: HOWITIS
republican here, totally against these laws. what ever happaned to Republicans hating Big Gov?
Dem here, and I thought about that too today...GW was all about pushing less Gov power back in the debates...
 

Willoughbyva

Diamond Member
Sep 26, 2001
3,267
0
0
I am a middle of the road guy. I have voted both democrat and republican. I think this sucks. It is sort of like doing away with the constitution. I think that people should have privacy and that powers of the government should be limited. Stuff like this really does scares me. Not because I have done anything wrong, but because there is always the possiability of abuse of powers. It has happened in the past and I can only assume that it will happen again since government is made up of individuals with their own agenda and actions.
 

Triumph

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,031
14
81
If this passes, hopefully the Supreme Court will come through for us. Otherwise, the system of checks and balances will have completely failed the American people.
 

Electrode

Diamond Member
May 4, 2001
6,063
2
81
Someone tell me the bill number of that "Kyl-Schumer measure" they want to attach it to, and I'll call my Senators right now.
 

yellowperil

Diamond Member
Jan 17, 2000
4,598
0
0
The Patriot Act looks like a huge piece of legislation. It's hard to tell the scope of its impact just by looking at it because of all the changes it makes to other federal legislation (you would have to look them all up and figure out how the new language changes intent). I don't doubt that the majority of Congress voted for it in the heat of the moment without even reading it, because it was the 'patriotic' thing to do in a post-9/11 fervor.

This came up first in a Google search : link