Patriot Act News

Another Five Weeks

2006-02-02T10:58:00.000-05:00

From the Oroville Mercury-Register:

The House of Representatives agreed Wednesday to extend the USA Patriot Act for five weeks while lawmakers and the White House negotiate the terms of renewal and determine how to protect people from government intrusion.

The GOP-controlled House used a voice vote to keep the law in effect until March 10 so negotiators have more time to come up with a deal. The Senate was expected to also approve the extension before the law expires Friday.

See the Full Article Here:
http://www.orovillemr.com/news/bayarea/ci_3467771

Another Extension Probable

2006-02-01T15:46:00.000-05:00

From National Journal:
Congress is expected to extend expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act for another five weeks as negotiators seek a solution to the stalemate that prevented approval late last year, National Journal's Technology Daily reported. Discussions between the Senate and House Tuesday produced an agreement to extend the provisions until March 10, rather than March 14 as initially proposed by House Judiciary Chairman Sensenbrenner. The House was scheduled to take up the bill this afternoon, with the Senate now expected to follow suit. Without action, the provisions would expire Friday. No agreement has been reached yet over differences over several key portions of the law such as the terms on which anti-terrorism investigators can monitor electronic communications, access to business and library patron records, gag orders on recipients of secret subpoenas for information, and notification of suspects that they are under investigation.

Reauthorization Prospects Unclear; House Vote Possible Wednesday

2006-01-30T10:51:00.000-05:00

From National Journal:
A short-term extension of provisions of the anti-terrorism legislation known as the USA PATRIOT ACT is set to expire Friday [February 3, 2006], and prospects for another extension or a compromise between House and Senate versions are unclear.

House and Senate lawmakers negotiating a renewal of the law have been unable to reach an agreement on privacy provisions.

The two sides have been at an impasse since Congress adjourned for the holidays in December.
At that time, they agreed to a five-week extension of the current law.

The Senate is expected to pass another short-term extension, barring a last-minute breakthrough.

From the Whip Notice of the U.S. House of Representatives:

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 2006
On Wednesday, the House will meet at 10:00 a.m. for legislative business.

H.R. __ - to amend the USA PATRIOT ACT to extend the sunset of certain provisions of such Act (Subject to a Rule) (Sponsored by Rep. Sensenbrenner / Judiciary Committee)

Rumblings of Freedom?

2006-01-30T10:37:00.000-05:00

by Chip Pitts, Board President, Bill of Rights Defense Committee (www.bordc.org)

Could those distant rumblings really represent a growing chorus of the people and their representatives reclaiming their freedoms?

Maybe. There’s at least some unexpected drama surrounding the Patriot Act’s renewal. Recall that in December, a bipartisan group of senators rejected a Conference Report that favored the less-liberty sensitive House approach for reauthorizing 16 “sunsetting” Patriot Act provisions. Preferring the somewhat more liberty-sensitive, unanimous Senate version, they joined Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) in a filibuster that temporarily delayed the bill becoming law until February 3rd. The true patriots joining Feingold included Senators Larry Craig (R–ID), Dick Durbin (D–IL), John Sununu (R–NH), Barak Obama (D–IL), Lisa Murkowski (R- AK), John Kerry (D-MA), Chuck Hagel (R-NV), and Ken Salazar (D-CO).

While the 16 ‘most controversial’ provisions slated to sunset have received attention, many other dubious provisions haven’t been debated at all. However, President Bush and his supporters want to keep all these provisions and remove all but a couple of the sunsets – even though the presence of sunsets actually discouraged abuse and prompted the little Congressional oversight that occurred.

These partisans would allow only minor improvements offering illusory protections, such as a bit more reporting on the number of times provisions have been used, and Justice Department Inspector General audits. They’d require that section 215’s secret searches and seizures be “relevant” to an “investigation,” but this would still allow fishing expeditions on a standard failing to meet the traditionally required probable cause that the target is factually linked to terrorism or espionage. The FBI director (or a deputy) would approve searches for the most sensitive library, medical, educational, gun, and tax records, but these are merely higher ups in the same agency demanding the records. And some limited rights to challenge search orders and gag orders would be granted – but would usually fail under strong presumptions favoring the government.

Per U.S. News and World Report, the feds would still have a “virtually free hand to secretly rummage through the records and homes of ordinary Americans, even those with no ties to suspected terrorists or spies.” National security letters of the sort already issued to tens of thousands of American businesses, schools, libraries, and medical offices would continue without prior court authorization, each potentially reaching the records of many more people. This “anti-terrorist” law would still be used overwhelmingly in non-terrorist criminal cases, all under the guise of being “nothing new” – and simultaneously indispensable.

Far from being a partisan issue, this deceptive executive power-grab concerns – or should concern – all Americans. Perhaps that’s why so many diverse sources have insisted that individualized, fact-based suspicion and meaningful judicial review be reinserted into the law.

Such calls have come from leading legislators from both parties, top business organizations ranging from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to the National Association of Manufacturers, and not only progressive but also conservative organizations like Bob Barr’s Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances. “Just trust us” doesn’t fly after revelations that the President used the National Security Agency to illegally spy on Americans without warrants and used the Pentagon as well as the FBI to spy on nonviolent activists ranging from the ACLU and Greenpeace to the Quakers. It doesn't work when the administration has repeatedly ignored laws including even the Patriot Act itself to illegally roundup thousands of Muslims and Arabs after 9/11, to secretly detain people around the world, to torture and treat them cruelly, and even to engage in extrajudicial killings of the sort recently seen in Pakistan.

Disturbingly reminiscent of Nixon’s “enemies list” and the discredited COINTELPRO activity, these counterproductive and un-American activities harm security in many ways. Confusing innocent Americans or Muslims with al Qaeda wastes limited resources. As FBI officials have complained, it adds to the quantity of useless data to be sifted through. And spying on activists deters the scrutiny and criticism needed to correct government overreaching and mistakes. Less noticed than the warrantless surveillance has been the administration's program to infiltrate mosques, and station "radiation detectors" outside of mosques. This sort of targeting of peaceful religious adherents and political groups is deeply troubling.

Yet the President and his supporters have included in the new version of the Patriot Act provisions burdening free speech by criminalizing people who enter into areas “cordoned off” or “restricted” by the Secret Service for “events of national significance” – like the President’s stage-managed speeches to carefully sanitized audiences.

Take the opportunity to join the chorus: call and write your Senators and Congressmen, and get your friends, neighbors, and colleagues to do the same. Tell your representatives that you reject the Conference Report and insist at a minimum on the full protections in the Senate version, as well as additional sunsets. Together, the people and the people’s representatives can recapture our vanishing freedoms.

January 25 is National Call in Day! Call Now!

2006-01-25T12:49:00.000-05:00

Today, January 25, 2006 is a national call in day for reforming the Patriot Act.

Go here to make your phone call:
http://capwiz.com/cair/callalert/index.tt?alertid=8414691&type=CO

See the Bill of Rights Defense Committee's call in request here:
http://bordc.org/callin.php

See the Top Five Reasons Conservatives Support a Careful Review of Key Patriot Act Provisions here:
http://www.checksbalances.org/topfive.php

Organizations supporting the call-in day (partial list) include the Alliance for Justice, American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, American Civil Liberties Union, American Library Association, Amnesty International USA, Bill of Rights Defense Committee, Campaign for Reader Privacy, Center for Democracy and Technology, Code Pink, Council on American-Islamic Relations, First Amendment Foundation, Friends Committee on National Legislation, Global Exchange, League of United Latin American Citizens, League of Women Voters, Liberty Coalition, MoveOn.org Political Action, National Lawyers Guild, People For the American Way, Rights Working Group, San Francisco Labor Council, True Majority, Unitarian Universalist Association, and United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America.

Letter from Several Senators to Judiciary Chairman Sen. Arlen Specter

2006-01-09T11:25:00.000-05:00

Friday, January 6, 2006

The Honorable Arlen Specter
Chairman
U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary
224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Chairman Specter:

We were gratified that Congress agreed to extend the expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act at the end of last year’s Congressional session. Although the PATRIOT Act must be modified to better protect the constitutional rights of innocent Americans, the important tools the original law provides law enforcement in the fight against terrorism should not be allowed to expire.

This extension gives Congress and the Administration more time to add additional civil liberties safeguards to the PATRIOT Act reauthorization conference report – safeguards that in no way will hinder law enforcement’s ability to investigate and prosecute terrorists. As you will recall, last year we identified our most serious concerns with the conference report in a Dear Colleague letter (a copy of which is attached for your convenience).

We appreciate the hard work you have done to bring the Congress close to agreement on a final PATRIOT Act reauthorization bill. However, we still firmly believe that modest but critical changes can and must be made to the conference report to address the needs of law enforcement and protect the civil liberties of law-abiding Americans.

We look forward to working closely with you this month to pass an improved PATRIOT Act reauthorization bill before the expiring provisions sunset on February 3rd.

Sincerely,

Larry E. Craig
Richard J. Durbin
John E. Sununu
Russell D. Feingold
Lisa Murkowski
Ken Salazar
Chuck Hagel
John F. Kerry
Barack Obama

Community Efforts to Change Patriot Act Paid Off; More Will be Needed Soon

2006-01-06T07:12:00.000-05:00

A letter from former Rep. Bob Barr

Dear [Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances] Member:

Thank you for your efforts to help reform the USA Patriot Act. Because of your letters, emails, phone calls and faxes, Congress now understands that the American people strongly support reforming the act to protect civil liberties. Your tireless support for restoring constitutional checks and balances to the law helped lawmakers realize the importance of including meaningful checks on federal power in the final reauthorization bill. The fact that Congress passed a five-week extension to the Patriot Act instead of rushing through the flawed conference report at the eleventh hour is a testament to your efforts.

However, the battle is not over: Just because lawmakers agreed on an extension does not mean they will agree on the inclusion of critical civil liberties and privacy protections in the final bill. These protections are more important now than ever, given that the President has been authorizing intelligence investigators to spy on Americans citizens without warrants. This is a direct violation of federal surveillance laws that, although modified by permanent parts of the Patriot Act, never removed the requirement of judicial approval for wiretaps. Before extending the expiring parts of the Patriot Act, it is imperative that Congress agree to the Senate-passed amendment to Section 215, which would require the government to link the records it seeks to a suspected foreign terrorist, and apply a similar requirement to the National Security Letter (NSL) powers that were expanded by the Patriot Act.

When Congress reconvenes later this month, we will again enlist your support to encourage lawmakers to stand behind a Patriot Act reauthorization bill that does not infringe upon ordinary Americans’ Fourth Amendment right to privacy. This means withstanding increased pressure from the administration to support the flawed conference report, and instead supporting commonsense fixes that will keep Americans safe from the terrorist threat abroad and from unwarranted government snooping at home.

Thank you again for your continuing support.

Sincerely,
Bob Barr
Chairman, Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances
Member of Congress, 1995-2003

New Year Brings Election Minded Campaign

2006-01-04T07:40:00.000-05:00

Excerpts from the Washington Post

President Bush accused Democrats yesterday of blocking a full reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act for political reasons, as the White House stepped up an aggressive campaign to defend the president's terrorism-fighting authority.

The White House is bracing for a heated dispute over both the Patriot Act and the recent revelations that Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to monitor communications within the United States involving terrorism suspects overseas. Congress is planning hearings on the NSA program this month and another vote on the Patriot Act early next month, when the current extension expires.

Adopting campaign-style tactics, Bush and his aides plan to accuse Democrats of jeopardizing national security to further their political agenda, a tack that worked well for the White House in the 2002 and 2004 elections.

Read the full article here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/03/AR2006010301282.html

Expect a Contentious and Argumentative 2006

2005-12-27T10:22:00.000-05:00

Excerpts from an opinion piece published by the Christian Science Monitor

In the process of declaring war on terrorism and terrorists and, of course, terror in general, the Bush administration has, inadvertently or not, declared war on the other two branches of government and they are not amused. So expect a contentious and argumentative 2006.

The revelation that the administration, without the court's approval, ordered the National Security Agency (NSA) to tap phone calls and monitor e-mails going in and out of the country has led to a revolt by the judiciary and the Congress.

The most vexing fallout for the White House at the moment is the extremely short-term renewal of the Patriot Act in the Congress. The law will be open for discussion again in five weeks, which is when the Hill will begin to debate the NSA phone-tapping, and the mood will almost certainly grow sourer as the revelations continue to drip out.

None of this should be unexpected. There are, according to the Constitution, three coequal branches of government in the United States and when one of them starts stepping on the others' toes, there are going to be problems.Immediately after 9/11 a lot of concessions were made to the executive branch, but times change, the norm reasserts itself and people begin to have second thoughts - in both parties there's nothing saying the next president will be a Republican and that is almost certainly weighing on GOP minds.

Of course, it is a time of war, and in times of war the executive branch usually cites the need for special powers to keep the country safe. The inevitable parallels have already been drawn between the "war on terror" and other conflicts - World War I, World War II, the Civil War - but there are some notable differences in this war and they mean the usual claims of special powers, and particularly extraordinary ones, will be a hard sell.

The US is at war with no country or government this time around. There is no "front" in the traditional sense. There will be no peace treaty signed when the battle is done. And it is unclear whether we'll even know when the battle is actually done. The "war on terror" will go on for years, likely decades.And all of that means the extension of any special powers could become largely permanent if they are not challenged. Congress and the courts aren't happy about signing over powers for any amount of time, but indefinitely? Not likely.

Read the full opinion article here:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1227/p09s02-codc.html

Congress Sends Extension to President, will expire Feb. 3

2005-12-22T21:52:00.000-05:00

Excerpt from the LA Times

The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee refused Thursday to accept a Senate decision to extend expiring provisions of the Patriot Act for six months, giving his approval only to a much shorter five-week extension.The shorter extension passed by voice vote in a near-empty House and by unanimous consent hours later in the Senate, with just one lawmaker -- Sen. John Warner, R-Va., who lives nearby -- present. It effectively puts off until late January a showdown over the controversial legislation, which was quickly passed in the weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks to grant law enforcement sweeping new powers to investigate terrorism.

If the president, as expected, signs the extension, it will expire Feb. 3.

Read the full article here:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-congress23dec23,1,3893390.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

House Rejects Six Month Extension, Counters with Four Weeks

2005-12-22T16:48:00.000-05:00

From the Associated Press:

The House passed a one-month extension of the Patriot Act on Thursday and sent it to the Senate for final action as Congress scrambled to prevent expiration of anti-terror law enforcement provisions on Dec. 31.

Approval came on a voice vote in a nearly empty chamber, after Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, refused to agree to a six-month extension the Senate cleared several hours earlier.

House passage marked the latest step in a stalemate that first pitted Republicans against Democrats in the Senate, then turned into an intramural GOP dispute.

It was not clear when the Senate would act on the one-month bill, but approval was possible by evening.

Passage of a one-month extension would require lawmakers to debate the issue early in 2006, and is certain to require concessions to the Senate critics who are seeking greater privacy protections.

Bush also has the authority to call Congress back into session to prevent the expiration of the existing law before Dec. 31. Several Republican officials said earlier in the week he had been prepared to do so if Congress adjourned without acting on the renewal.

Bush indicated that he would sign the extension. "The work of Congress on the Patriot Act is not finished," Bush said. "The act will expire next summer, but the terrorist threat to America will not expire on that schedule. I look forward to continuing to work with Congress to reauthorize the Patriot Act."

See the full article here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051222/ap_on_go_co/patriot_act;_ylt=Ajfg0qgFJZKjQBU_aKvewXGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

Senate Agrees To Six Month Extension

2005-12-21T21:20:00.000-05:00

Excerpts from Associated Press

The deal…would still need to get the approval of the Republican-controlled House and President Bush, but it would keep the Patriot Act provisions from expiring on Dec. 31.

[CAIR Note: The U.S. House will reconvene in a pro forma session, in form only, at 4 p.m. Thursday. Senate Leader Frist has said he did not consult with House leaders while agreeing to the six-month compromise.]

Excerpts from National Journal:

The extension is a defeat for President Bush, who earlier in the day excoriated Democrats for blocking reauthorization of the expiring provisions and putting the nation at risk of terrorism attacks, although Bush late Wednesday indicated he would sign the extension.

[Senate Majority Leader Bill] Frist had insisted up until Wednesday morning that he would not accept a short-term extension of the current law. Republicans over the past several days floated various proposals to maintain the status quo and to extend the 16 expiring provisions. But that position softened after a Senate aide said Senate Judiciary Chairman Specter had managed to convince the four Republicans who voted against cloture to switch their votes but were still four votes short of the 60 needed to limit debate and bring the bill to a vote.

Also from the Associated Press

The agreement capped several days of backroom negotiation conducted against the backdrop of presidential attacks on critics of the legislation. The Patriot Act provisions will expire on Dec. 31 if the House and Senate do not act.

The extension gives critics — who successfully filibustered a House-Senate compromise that would have made most of the law permanent — more time to seek civil liberty safeguards in the law. Democrats and their allies had originally asked for a three month extension, and the Senate's Republican majority had offered a one-year extension. The final deal split the difference.

Deal Nearing?

2005-12-21T17:48:00.000-05:00

Excerpts from the Associated Press:

A deal preserving the expiring portions of the terror-fighting USA Patriot Act may be in the works, Senate Judiciary chairman Arlen Specter said Wednesday.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Specter said he held secret talks and chances of a deal "are brighter in the last half hour than they've been for six days."

Without some sort of compromise, the 16 provisions expire on Dec. 31.
Specter said he is trying to broker a deal that would allow the Senate to pass the current legislation "on my commitment to take up issues that they are so worried about. We'd have hearings early next year and consider the amendments, no commitment as to passage, but give consideration to that so we don't have the Patriot Act lapse, since it's important to America."

Specter held out hope that a deal could be made quickly. "I think there's a fairly good chance at this moment," he said.

Read the full article here:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-12-21-patriot_x.htm

Backers of Short-Term Patriot Act Extension Claim Senate Majority

2005-12-21T14:49:00.000-05:00

From Congressional Quarterly

Senators blocking a vote on legislation that would reauthorize expiring provisions of the Patriot Act say they now have a majority willing to support a three-month extension of the current law to allow negotiators more time to work out lingering differences on the broad bill.

In a letter sent today to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., 52 senators urged Frist to drop his opposition to the short-term extension and pass such a bill before the 16 provisions on the 2001 anti-terrorism law expire Dec. 31.

Four Republicans added their names to the list supporting a temporary extension. That brings the total to eight Republicans, 43 Democrats and one independent.

But Frist continued to hold firm and demanded that Democrats stop the filibuster and allow a vote on the full reauthorization. President Bush has said he would not sign the extension if cleared.

Temporary Extension Looking More Likely; Four Republicans Hold Key

2005-12-21T09:45:00.000-05:00

Excerpt from the Democratic Leadership Alert, Senate Floor Schedule:

Before we leave for the break, we also expect to consider the Labor, HHS Appropriations conference report, a temporary extension of the Patriot Act, Executive Calendar nominations, an adjournment resolution, and any other legislative items cleared for action.

(CAIR Note: Leadership alerts, or Whip notices, are issued daily to inform Senators and their staff on expected events on the Senate floor. There is no mention of the Patriot Act in today's Majority Daily Whip Notice. Whips are Members of Congress who are assigned by their respective party to count potential votes and promote party unity when voting. )

From National Journal:
The Senate also might address an extension or reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act today

Excerpts from United Press International:

Four Republican members of the U.S. Senate have joined the bulk of the Democratic caucus in stopping votes making the USA Patriot Act permanent.

While the Republican Party leadership has been pointing to Democrats seeking extra time to discuss reauthorization of the act, it is the Republican holdouts who have control over the measure.

Those senators, The Washington Post points out, cannot be pigeonholed: Larry Craig is a strong conservative from Idaho, and Chuck Hagel is a Nebraskan thought to have his sights set on the presidency while Alaska's Lisa Murkowski and New Hampshire's John Sununu come from families that have long served their states.

The Republican holdouts have the same concerns as the Democrats about the Patriot Act and they don't appear ready to budge.

"I took an oath of office to the Constitution. I didn't take an oath of office to my party or my president," Hagel said recently.

Tuesday's Developments

2005-12-20T15:00:00.000-05:00

Excerpt from Congressional Quarterly:

Senate Democrats continue to press for a temporary extension of 16 expiring provisions of the Patriot Act, but Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., so far is refusing to budge from his demand for an “up or down” vote on a rewrite of the law.

…Frist [is] adamant, for now. “The Patriot Act right now needs to be voted on, up or down vote, on the floor of the United States Senate,” he said.

President Bush May be Cornered by Veto Threat

2005-12-20T14:32:00.000-05:00

Excerpt from the Evans-Novak Political Report

Bush may have gone too far in threatening a veto of any temporary extension of the current [Patriot Act]. The threat is meant to discourage Congress from doing anything besides reauthorizing the bill completely. But it amounts to daring Congress to take the easiest possible path -- something it could very well do. Bush would then be humiliated, forced to back down and sign such an extension, lest the Patriot Act expire at year's end.

Bush's standing has recovered somewhat in the last two weeks, but even with public speeches on the importance of the Patriot Act to protecting Americans, he probably still lacks the clout to shame legislators into passing the bill by year's end unless he agrees to some significant concessions. Also, the revelation of NSA spying on private citizens is a downer for him politically.

With the U.S. House Gone Home Chances of a Modified Patriot Act Slim, Expiration Possible

2005-12-20T10:16:00.000-05:00

Excerpts from the Los Angeles Times

A large majority of senators in both parties want to renew the Patriot Act, but they have disagreed on whether to add provisions that some say would better protect civil liberties. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and other members of his party have proposed extending the current version of the law for three months to allow more time to negotiate a compromise. Bush and Republican leaders have insisted on an immediate, all-or-nothing vote.

The issue has turned into a high-stakes game of political chicken. Bush and his allies appear prepared to allow the law to lapse after Dec. 31 -- and hope Democrats would be blamed.

[Senate Minority Leader] Reid said he hoped Bush would blink and allow a short-term extension of the act.

But Bush and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) have opposed the idea. Reid cannot force a vote on the Senate floor without Frist's consent.

[Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen] Specter said he was trying to break the logjam over the Patriot Act but noted that it was probably impossible to amend the law before the end of the year, because any change would require assent from the House."With the House out of session, I do not know how we can alter" the current version of the bill, Specter said.

See the full article here:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bush20dec20,1,2026179.story?coll=la-headlines-nation&ctrack=1&cset=true

At Least 40 Senators Support Three-Month Extension Option

2005-12-19T15:17:00.000-05:00

From National Journal:

The Senate standoff over legislation to extend expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act continued today.

President Bush again called on the Senate to pass the conference report on the bill that has been blocked by a filibuster, while Senate Minority Leader Reid's attempt to pass a three-month extension was rebuffed by Senate Republicans.

At a news conference, Bush said "the senators who are filibustering the PATRIOT Act must stop their delaying tactics, and the Senate must vote to reauthorize the PATRIOT Act."

While not identifying them by name, Bush singled out Reid and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., who voted against cloture on the conference report last week. "I want senators from New York or Los Angeles or Las Vegas to explain why these cities are safer. It is inexcusable to say on the one hand, 'Connect the dots' and not give us a chance to do so," he said.

That prompted Reid to go to the Senate floor, where he made unanimous consent requests to either pass a three-month extension proposed by Sen. John Sununu, R-N.H., or an earlier version as approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., objected to both requests.

As of Monday, 40 of the senators who voted against cloture had co-sponsored the Sununu three-month extension.

Impasse Continues

2005-12-19T10:52:00.000-05:00

Excerpts from the New York Times

Senators on both sides agree that the law is necessary, yet on Sunday, their efforts to renew it remained stalled. Democrats are pressing for a three-month extension to give lawmakers time to settle their differences, but the White House and the Senate majority leader, Bill Frist, have refused.

With the House trying to adjourn for the year early Monday and the Senate by midweek, Mr. Frist said Sunday that he had not decided whether to call for a second vote. Mr. Specter, meanwhile, said Sunday that he had called his Democratic counterpart, Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, to suggest a change in the bill. But asked if he thought it was still possible to get the bill passed, Mr. Specter did not sound optimistic. "Well, barely," he said.

Polls show that public support for the Patriot Act has waned over time and that the more Americans know about the act, the less they like it.

An ABC News poll in June found that half of Americans believed the government was doing enough to protect their privacy, down from three-quarters shortly after the act was passed. A Gallup poll, also conducted in June, found that 30 percent believed the Patriot Act went "too far" in restricting civil liberties, but among those very familiar with the bill, the figure was 45 percent.

And a University of Connecticut survey, published in August, found that roughly three-quarters of Americans worried that the Patriot Act would be abused to investigate matters unrelated to terrorism.

"The polls are pretty clear that voters want limits on the government's power," said Geoff Garin, a Democratic strategist. "This is really an argument not about fighting terrorism but about checks and balances and unbridled government authority."

Mr. Garin says the Patriot Act generates particular suspicion among white male voters, who resist government intrusion on matters ranging from gun ownership to property rights. That could explain why the biggest supporter of gun rights in the Senate, Senator Larry Craig, Republican of Idaho, is among those backing the filibuster.

Another Republican backer of the filibuster, Senator John E. Sununu of New Hampshire, said: "In my state, I think there's pretty strong support for protecting civil liberties during times of war and peace."

Read the full article here (free subscription required, filling out the form takes about two minutes):
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/19/politics/19patriot.html?pagewanted=1

U.S. Senate takes the higher ground in terrorism fight

2005-12-18T12:42:00.000-05:00

Excerpts from a San Jose Mercury News Editorial:

The Sept. 11 attacks have forced our country to confront serious issues about liberty and defense as it continues to battle the evil forces of terrorism. Fortunately, we have the U.S. Senate to help keep our moral compass.

The Senate's action last week to force President Bush to back down and agree to a ban on the torture of terrorist suspects in U.S. custody was a clear sign that we will stake out a higher ground when it comes to prisoner treatment -- whether Bush likes it or not. The next day, the Senate voted to delay passage of the Patriot Act until measures to protect civil liberties are strengthened -- again, despite the president's wishes.

Americans take seriously and support the fight against terrorism and the defense of this country. But they won't follow blindly. The Senate is right not to allow the president to step on fundamental principles of our republic with his usual swagger. And it must continue to provide the necessary counterbalance to some of the administration's misguided anti-terrorism plans.

…on Friday, came a Senate showdown on extension of the Patriot Act's most controversial provisions. The 16 provisions, which were passed shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, are set to expire Dec. 31. Supporters urged renewal of what they called essential tools to fight terrorism. But opponents objected to measures that have allowed unchecked government wiretaps and access to such things as library records without adequate court oversight.

In a second blow to Bush in as many days, a bipartisan Senate refused to extend the provisions after a vigorous debate about balancing personal liberties and national security. Instead, leaders like Sens. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and Larry Craig, R-Idaho, are pushing to extend the current law for a limited time so they can continue to push for more civil liberties safeguards.

Although the president has said he will not compromise, he's not in much of a position to make demands after last week's votes. He would do better to learn from those in the Senate who believe the war on terror is not an excuse to trample on the fundamental principles of our democracy.

Read the full editorial here:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/13435708.htm

Senator Feingold Responds to President Bush

2005-12-17T22:42:00.000-05:00

From the web site of Sen. Feingold:

United States Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) made the following statement today in response to the President's weekly radio address. The statement is available as a radio actuality at the following number: 800-511-0763, Code 4945.

The text follows:

"Yesterday morning, Republican and Democratic Senators blocked a flawed bill that extended parts of the Patriot Act that are set to expire without fixing the fundamental problems with the law. Nobody wants these parts of the Patriot Act to expire -- we want to fix them before making them permanent, by including important protections for the rights and freedoms of innocent American citizens.

With a few modest but critical improvements, like making sure that when the government seeks library records it has to show that those records have some connection to a suspected terrorist or spy, we can give the government the powers it needs while also protecting the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. The President can sign a bill into law tomorrow to reauthorize the Patriot Act if he will agree to the bill that the Senate unanimously passed in July or he could extend the law for a short period so negotiations can continue.

The President's shocking admission that he authorized the National Security Agency to spy on American citizens, without going to a court and in violation of the Constitution and laws passed by Congress, further demonstrates the urgent need for these protections. The President believes that he has the power to override the laws that Congress has passed. This is not how our democratic system of government works. The President does not get to pick and choose which laws he wants to follow. He is a president, not a king.

On behalf of all Americans who believe in our constitutional system of government, I call on this Administration to stop this program immediately and to fully cooperate with congressional inquiries and investigations. We have had enough of an Administration that puts itself above the law and the Constitution."

Success for Civil Liberties Supporters

2005-12-16T14:00:00.000-05:00

Attempt to End Debate on Patriot Act Reauthorization, Force It's Renewal, Fails
From the Associated Press:

A bipartisan group of U.S. senators, demanding increased protection of civil liberties, defied President George W. Bush on Friday and blocked legislation to renew the USA Patriot Act, a centerpiece of his war on terrorism.

On a Senate vote of 52-47, mostly Republican backers of the measure fell eight short of the needed 60 to end debate and move to passage of it.

"None of us wants it to expire, and those who threaten to let it expire rather than fix it are playing a dangerous game," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat.

Read the full article here;
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2005-12-16T175338Z_01_SIB572032_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-PATRIOT.xml&rpc=22

How did the Senators vote?
Yea is a vote to end debate and force passage of the Patriot Act reauthorization. 52 Senators voted Yea. 60 Yea votes were needed.

Nay is a vote supporting a filibuster of the Patriot Act reauthorization. 47 Senators voted Nay.

See the votes here:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00358

How the Vote Would Go Was Unclear all Week. What Happened?
From National Journal:

What appears to have tipped the balance for several senators was a New York Times story that said Bush authorized the National Security Agency in 2002 to eavesdrop on international phone calls and e-mail traffic without any oversight by the courts.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. said during debate that he had gone to bed undecided about how to vote, but the Times story had shocked him. "If this government will discard a law that that has worked well for over 30 years without a wit of discussion or notice, then for sure we better be certain that we have safeguards on that government," he said. "I tend to be fairly hawkish on these types of things, as my colleagues know, but there's one thing for sure: There ought to be discussion."

What Will Happen Now?
From Congressional Quarterly:
A nearly unanimous bloc of Senate Democrats, joined by a handful of Republicans, blocked consideration of a bill Friday that would reauthorize the 16 expiring provisions of the Patriot Act, leaving in limbo the sections of the law that are set to expire Dec. 31.

Afterward, Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, tried to bring a three-month extension of the anti-terrorism law to the floor, but Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., objected.

Frist said President Bush would not sign a short-term extension. That left the next step unclear. The measure (HR 3199 — H Rept 109-333) is still on the floor, but there is no readily apparent avenue for compromise.

Opponents of the bill want a new conference. Supporters say the version now on the floor is the best deal they are likely to get. Frist had suggested earlier in the week that a one-year extension might be a possibility.

Three Month Extension Proposal Tossed

2005-12-16T10:44:00.000-05:00

From the Associated Press:

The Senate scrapped a Democratic-led effort to extend the USA Patriot Act for three months, increasing prospects that provisions President Bush considers indispensable to the war on terrorism may soon expire.

"The House of Representatives opposes such an extension and the president will not sign such an extension," Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist told his colleagues in a floor showdown Friday as lawmakers scurried to finish business for the year.

The Senate was still weighing a proposed accord with the House to extend the expiring 16 provisions of the law enacted in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks. But that compromise appeared to lack the necessary votes to succeed.

Read the full article here:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20051216/D8EHDNFO0.html

Senate Arithmetic Continues

2005-12-16T08:38:00.000-05:00

From the Associated Press:

He was a minority of one four years ago, when he cast the lone Senate vote against the USA Patriot Act in the traumatic weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks. The law, he said then, gave government too much power to investigate its citizens. Ninety-nine senators disagreed.

Now add more than two dozen senators to Feingold's side, including the leaders of his party and some of the chamber's most conservative Republicans, and the balance of power shifts.

The new Senate arithmetic that emerged this week is enough to place the renewal of major portions of the law in doubt.

…the senior Democrat on the issue, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., told reporters that more than 40 votes exist to sustain a filibuster in a test vote Friday.

Feingold, D-Wis., finds himself with some unlikely allies, including the Christian Defense Coalition. Notably, the National Rifle Association has not endorsed the Patriot Act renewal that was personally negotiated by Vice President Dick Cheney.

"Folks, when we're dealing with civil liberties, you don't compromise them," said Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, an NRA board member.

Read the full article here:
http://www.forbes.com/technology/feeds/ap/2005/12/15/ap2395619.html

Exclusive: Former Amnesty International USA Board Chairman on Patriot Act Reauthorization

2005-12-15T09:07:00.000-05:00

by Chip Pitts
Board President, Bill of Rights Defense Committee
www.bordc.org
Immediate Past Chair, Amnesty International USA
12/14/05

With the House of Representative's cowardly vote today to accept the Conference Report reauthorizing the Patriot Act, hope now rests with the Senate.

A courageous bipartisan group of Senators including Senators Russ Feingold,
Dick Durbin, Larry Craig, Chuck Hagel, John Sununu, John Kerry, Barak Obama, Ken Salazar and Lisa Murkowski, have stood up for the protections contained in the Senate version of the reauthorization bill. While not perfect, that version would at least require that there be some factual connection to a terrorist or spy alleged before the government exercises its extraordinary new search and seizure powers. They have threatened a filibuster, in response to which Republican Majority Leader Sen. Bill Frist is negotiating with the White House to see if the Patriot Act can be extended e.g. up to another year while the provisions are reviewed in more detail.

While the Bush administration and its supporters on the Patriot Act claim there have been "no abuses" of the Patriot Act, the Muslim community of course knows this is untrue. The mere existence of the Patriot Act powers is an abuse, because such broad powers chill importance civil and human rights (like free expression and the privacy needed to gather information and ask reasonable questions of government to protect against abuses and vulnerabilities). The secrecy mandated by the Patriot Act's gag orders makes it virtually impossible to know of and report on abuses.

Nevertheless, many abuses have come to light. Can it be mere coincidence that the cases - such as those involving Portland attorney Brandon Mayfield, Idaho student Sami al-Hussayn, moderate Muslim scholar Tariq Ramadan, and the seizure of assets of the major Muslim charities in the United States -largely involve Muslims? The other main uses of the Patriot Act have been against peaceful dissidents and civil liberties activists, and for ordinary
crimes (and not against terrorists).

Furthermore, it is important to realize that most of the Patriot Act provisions - such as the broad definition of terrorism that chills peaceful dissent and civil disobedience, and the Attorney General's power to detain foreigners essentially indefinitely - were not subject to sunsets and therefore were not debated in any depth at all.

Those provisions of the law that have received some attention - the so-called "library" provision(section 215), the sneak-and-peek home search provision (section 213), and the National Security Letters provision (section 505) - are still fatally overbroad in the Conference Report version, and tilted toward the executive branch, raising serious constitutional and human rights issues.

House Judiciary Chairman Sensenbrenner, Senator Jeff Sessions, and others are using absurd scare tactics to claim that Patriot Act critics want to rebuild the so-called "wall" between criminal law enforcement and intelligence agencies. This is highly misleading, both because the alleged wall was much more one of bureaucratic and cultural barriers as opposed to legal barriers, and because no one opposes information sharing - just an absence of reasonable and constitutional checks and balances! The 9/11 Commission just recently gave the government a "D" in the information sharing area, because those cultural and bureaucratic barriers still exist.

It is these human flaws, and not the absence of governmental powers, that has been identified by the 9/11 Commission as the principal reason that our government failed to prevent the terrorist attacks on that date.

Instead of carefully tailored measures that make us safer and protect against actual terrorists, the Bush administration is insisting on overbroad, discriminatory, and counterproductive provisions that violate civil and human rights, alienate the communities on whom we depend for effective intelligence, distract law enforcement attention and resources from the true terrorists, and damage our most cherished values.

Please take this crucial opportunity to preserve and defend your constitutional rights by (i) letting your Senators know (look up their phone numbers via http://www.senate.gov/) that you want them to SUPPORT the filibuster and at least the reasonable reforms contained in the SENATE version of the Patriot Act reauthorization, and they should vote NO on theConference report, and (ii) getting everyone you know to do the same!

[CAIR Note: As mentioned in our previous post, you can follow the link below for easy step-by-step instructions and talking points:
http://capwiz.com/cair/callalert/index.tt?alertid=8313031]

Patriot Debate on Senate Floor Today

2005-12-15T08:53:00.000-05:00

From the Senate Leadership Alert:

The Senate will convene at 9:00 a.m. ...[after about an hour-and-a-half] the Senate will resume consideration of thePatriot Act conference report for two hours, with the time equally divided between the two Leaders or their designees. Following that twohour time period, the Senate will recess until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the Policy Luncheons.

[CAIR Note: You can watch the debate on C-Span 2.]

Call your Senators and express your opinion today, follow the link below for easy step-by-step instructions and talking points:
http://capwiz.com/cair/callalert/index.tt?alertid=8313031

Frist and Feingold Fencing

2005-12-14T15:31:00.000-05:00

From National Journal:

Senate Majority Leader Frist today announced he will file a cloture motion on the conference report on legislation to reauthorize 14 provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act when that report arrives from the House.

[CAIR Editorial Note: From the U.S. Senate Glossary: “cloture - The only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place a time limit on consideration of a bill or other matter, and thereby overcome a filibuster. Under the cloture rule (Rule XXII), the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours, but only by vote of three-fifths of the full Senate, normally 60 votes.”]

The report should arrive sometime later today…

With the cloture motion, the Senate is expected to debate the bill Friday.

"We have substantial support on the Democratic side and significant support on the Republican side," Feingold said. "Significant means potentially having the support to prevail [over a cloture motion]," he added.

U.S. House Passes Patriot Act Conference Report

2005-12-14T14:16:00.000-05:00

The report passed 251-174.
Roll call vote number 627.

You can see how your U.S. Representative voted here:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll627.xml

An Associated Press article published immediately after the vote notes: ..."but with the bill facing a Senate filibuster, its Republican leader began talks with the White House on instead extending the current law unchanged for a year. "

The article also says: "Senate vote-counters trying to tally support and opposition for an agreement that would revise the 2001 anti-terror law were unable to precisely gauge its prospects Wednesday."

Sensenbrenner Threatens To Allow PATRIOT Act To Expire

2005-12-14T12:01:00.000-05:00

From National Journal:

House Judiciary Chairman Sensenbrenner, saying a three-month extension of the USA PATRIOT Act is not "a feasible alternative" to reauthorizing it, threatened Tuesday to allow some provisions to expire if the Senate does not approve the conference report containing the reauthorization.

With key parts of the law set to expire at the end of the year, Sensenbrenner joined House Homeland Security Chairman King and Attorney General Gonzales at a news conference to try to derail an attempt by Democrats to buy more time by approving an extension instead of a reauthorization.

The conference report is set for a vote in the House today.

"I would like to tell the opponents of this conference report that [it] contains scores of civil liberties protections that were not in the original PATRIOT Act. If the conference report goes down, those improvements will be lost as well," Sensenbrenner said.

A threatened filibuster in the Senate might prevent passage of the legislation before Congress adjourns for the year, meaning the provisions would expire without a temporary extension. Sensenbrenner said the expiration of one provision would put "the American people at greater risk, starting with the wall going back up so the FBI and CIA cannot share notes. We cannot afford to have the wall go back up."

Sensenbrenner's comments came as Sens. John Sununu, R-N.H., and Russell Feingold, D-Wis., made impassioned speeches on the Senate floor Tuesday about problems they perceive with the conference report, which is headed for debate in both chambers this week.

Feingold and Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, have both threatened to filibuster the reauthorization legislation and both conservative and civil liberties groups this week have sent letters urging senators to vote against cutting off debate. By Sarah Lai Stirland

Feingold on the Possible Filibuster

2005-12-13T10:48:00.000-05:00

Sen Russ Feingold writes:

The current betting is that the House will take up the Patriot Act conference report tomorrow (Wednesday). If it passes, it will then come to the Senate, and a vote to cut off debate - i.e., prevent a filibuster -- is likely to take place Friday morning. So that's the key vote in the Senate. Now is the time to contact your Senators to urge them to oppose cloture and insist that a Patriot Act reauthorization bill include the modest but crucial reforms that I and the other bipartisan opponents of the conference report have recommended.
With your help, I believe we can win the vote Friday. And don't forget your representatives in the House. The vote there is not a foregone conclusion.

See the full post, along with other information, here:
http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/12/13/102010/33

Patriot Act Reauthorization Bloated with Pork

2005-12-13T10:32:00.000-05:00

From ZDnet.com:

What do mandatory drug testing, cigarette taxes and methamphetamine restrictions have to do with protecting America from terrorists?

As far as I can tell, the answer is "nothing." But they nevertheless appear in a 219-page proposed law to renew the Patriot Act that Republicans have scheduled for a vote this week.

Some bizarre (and some relevant) examples follow. The conference report:

• Reduces the amount of contraband cigarettes that qualifies as a federal crime. The number drops from 60,000 cigarettes to 10,000.

• Increases electronic surveillance of visitors and tourists by ditching a requirement that a surveillance target must be an agent of a "foreign power." Extends electronic monitoring of visitors' and tourists' Internet activities and telephone dialing habits from 90 days to one year.

• Boosts criminal penalties: Possessing methamphetamine for distribution to a minor yields a prison term of up to 20 years. Requires a "feasibility study" of a new federal drug court, and funds mandatory drug testing.

Read the full article here:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5991773.html

Senate Vote Improbable Before Wednesday

2005-12-12T15:15:00.000-05:00

From National Journal:
The Senate returned this afternoon for what GOP leaders hope will be its last legislative week this year. While the USA PATRIOT Act, spending bills and budget and tax reconciliation conferences are among the Senate's unfinished business, no votes are expected until Wednesday morning.

To Track Your Cell Phone, the Standard is Lower than Probable Cause

2005-12-12T09:39:00.000-05:00

Excerpts From the New York Times December 10th edition:

Most Americans carry cellphones, but many may not know that government agencies can track their movements through the signals emanating from the handset.

In recent years, law enforcement officials have turned to cellular technology as a tool for easily and secretly monitoring the movements of suspects as they occur. But this kind of surveillance -- which investigators have been able to conduct with easily obtained court orders -- has now come under tougher legal scrutiny.

In the last four months, three federal judges have denied prosecutors the right to get cellphone tracking information from wireless companies without first showing ''probable cause'' to believe that a crime has been or is being committed. That is the same standard applied to requests for search warrants.

Cellular operators like Verizon Wireless and Cingular Wireless know, within about 300 yards, the location of their subscribers whenever a phone is turned on. Even if the phone is not in use it is communicating with cellphone tower sites, and the wireless provider keeps track of the phone's position as it travels. The operators have said that they turn over location information when presented with a court order to do so.

Prosecutors in the recent cases also unsuccessfully argued that the expanded police powers under the USA Patriot Act could be read as allowing cellphone tracking under a standard lower than probable cause.

WHIP NOTICE WEEK OF DECEMBER 12, 2005

2005-12-12T09:26:00.000-05:00

CAIR: The Whip Notice is published each week to inform Member of Congress about upcoming activity and votes. This excerpt from the Whip Notice projects a House vote on Patriot Act reauthorization either Wednesday or Thursday.

WHIP NOTICE WEEK OF DECEMBER 12, 2005

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2005 AND
THE BALANCE OF THE WEEK
On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will meet
at
10:00 a.m. for
legislative business.On Friday, the House will meet at
9:00
a.m. for legislative
business.

Conference Report on H.R.
3199 - USA
PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention
Reauthorization Act of 2005
(Subject to a
Rule) (Sponsored by Rep. Sensenbrenner
/ Judiciary
Committee)

Forecast from National Journal:

Reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act is also on tap this week. The House Wednesday is expected to approve the conference report reauthorizing the act, but the measure might be the subject of a filibuster in the Senate. If the filibuster succeeds, lawmakers are likely to resort to a three-month extension that would keep expiring provisions in place while negotiations continue.

Sen. Patrick Leahy on why Conference Committee Failed and His Concerns

2005-12-09T07:34:00.000-05:00

Excerpts From Remarks by Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-VT):

The conference committee had an opportunity to adjust the PATRIOT Act’s expiring provisions to protect the rights and liberties of all Americans more effectively. Regrettably, the opportunity was lost when Democratic conferees were excluded from key negotiations and the conference failed to meet to consider and vote on amendments.

If a satisfactory bill cannot be achieved by the end of the year, I will be proposing a three-month extension for the expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act. If three more months are needed to make this a better bill, then we should take and prudently use that time.

Let me touch briefly on some of the flaws in this conference report that are still troubling to Democratic and Republican senators, and to civil liberties advocates on both the right and the left.

Section 215
I am disappointed that the conference report did not come out closer to the Senate bill, especially on the standard for Section 215 – the so-called “library provision.” As it stands, the government can compel the production of business records merely upon a showing that the records were “relevant” to a terrorism investigation.

The Senate bill would have required the government to show that the records had some connection to a suspected terrorist or spy. This is a common-sense protection that would not hamstring the government, but would prevent government overreaching.

NSLs [National Security Letters]
The conference report also falls short on its treatment of National Security Letters, or NSLs. These are, in effect, a form of secret administrative subpoena. They are issued by FBI agents, without any court supervision, and recipients are prohibited from telling anyone that they have been served.

The conference report does not provide meaningful judicial review of an NSL’s gag order. It requires the court to accept as conclusive the government’s assertion that a gag order should not be lifted, unless the court determines the government is acting in bad faith. Despite strong opposition to this provision from the right and the left, the House Republicans refused to strip it out. House Republicans also refused, as an alternative, to impose a “sunset” on NSL authorities, to ensure closer oversight of, and public accountability for, their use.

The conference report also is loaded with extraneous provisions that have nothing to do with the expiring PATRIOT Act authorities, or even with terrorism. I am particularly concerned about the habeas provisions that were snuck into the conference report after all Democratic conferees were shut out of the room. These provisions have never been approved by either Judiciary Committee, and have been strongly opposed by the U.S. Judicial Conference and others.

Read Leahy's Full Statement Here:
http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200512/120805.html

Bipartisan Group of Senators Respond to Patriot Act Conference Report

2005-12-09T07:24:00.000-05:00

From Sen. Russ Feingold:

“We are gravely disappointed that the conference committee made so few changes to the Patriot Act reauthorization package that was circulated before the Thanksgiving recess. As we said then, we cannot support a conference report that does not contain modest but critical improvements, similar to those in the Senate-passed bill, to the most controversial provisions of the Patriot Act. We indicated before Thanksgiving that we would oppose a conference report like the one filed in the House today, and we believe many of our colleagues will join us.

Back in July, we supported a bipartisan compromise reauthorization bill that passed the Senate by unanimous consent. While that bill did not contain everything we would have wanted, it took important steps to protect the freedoms of innocent Americans. By insisting that modest protections for civil liberties be excluded from the conference report, the conferees bear responsibility for any possibility that some provisions of the Patriot Act could expire this year.

The sunsets this year provide our best opportunity to make the meaningful changes to the Patriot Act that the American public has demanded. We believe that this conference report will not be able to get through the Senate, while the Senate bill would easily pass the House if its leadership would bring it to a vote. We call on our House colleagues to reject this conference report, and to take up and pass the Senate compromise bill. We still can — and must — make sure that our laws give law enforcement agents the tools they need while providing safeguards to protect the constitutional rights of all Americans.”

Possible House Vote Wednesday, December 14

2005-12-08T15:39:00.000-05:00

From National Journal:
[Sen. Arlen] Specter said he expects the House to vote on the conference report next Wednesday, and Senate Majority Leader Frist said today it would come to the Senate floor next week.

House-Senate Deal on Reauthorization Reached, Votes Probable Next Week

2005-12-08T14:39:00.000-05:00

Excerpts from the Associated Press:

House and Senate negotiators reached an agreement Thursday to extend the USA Patriot Act, the government's premier anti-terrorism law, before it expires at the end of the month. But a Democratic senator threatened a filibuster to block the compromise.

"I will do everything I can, including a filibuster, to stop this Patriot Act conference report, which does not include adequate safeguards to protect our constitutional freedoms," said Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., who was the only senator to vote against the original version of the Patriot Act.

It takes 60 senators to overcome a filibuster in the 100-member Senate.

"I don't think there will be a filibuster," Specter said. "I don't think it will succeed if there is one."

The ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, has not yet decided whether to support the agreement, a spokesman said. But the GOP-majority negotiating committee has enough votes to send the House and Senate the compromise if all of the Republican negotiators agree to it.

The Senate is expected to vote on the compromise next week, Specter said. That would give them enough time to deal with any filibuster threats before the Patriot Act provisions expire on Dec. 31.

Read the full article here:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1386374

Final Patriot Act Reauthorization Moves Begin

2005-12-08T10:51:00.000-05:00

CAIR: As you will see from the article excerpts below, forces are gathering to undercut support for the band of six Senators who are trying to protect your civil liberties. It is vital that you support them. Call your elected officals today and ask them to support the six Senators who are seeking to reform portions of the Patriot Act. Make sure your friends and colleagues call as well.

From: ZDNET

Sen. Arlen Specter…said Wednesday that he and his counterparts in the House of Representatives have agreed to a deal that could pave the way for reauthorization of the Patriot Act by next week.

"The vice president helped out a little yesterday and after a lot of haggling, I signed the conference report at 9:00 p.m.," Specter said in a statement sent to CNET News.com. "They brought it to my house."

But a band of six Democratic and Republican senators--who lodged strong objections to the draft conference report prepared last month--is likely to block a vote unless their concerns about privacy and overly broad surveillance are addressed. Sen. Russ Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat and member of the group, said through a spokesman on Wednesday that he had not reviewed the final text.

One important but unanswered question is how much support the group of six senators can muster among their colleagues. At a press conference last month, the group called for reforming portions of the Patriot Act that deal with library and other business record acquisitions, secret "National Security Letters" that have been used against Internet service providers, and delayed search warrants that permit police to secretly enter a home and notify the person weeks or months later.

Specter's office did not make the text of the final bill available. But according to interviews with staffers and lobbyists, not one of those three changes has been made.

As a way to twist arms, House Republicans are expected to schedule a vote before Christmas, which would let them and the Bush administration characterize the Senate as obstructionist. A spokesman for the House Judiciary Committee said a floor vote had been anticipated for Thursday but has been delayed: "It won't be on the floor tomorrow. That was our hope earlier today, but it's not going to happen."

Read the Full Article Here:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5986379.html

In Major Setback For DOJ, Florida Terror Trial Ends In Acquittals, Deadlock

2005-12-07T10:59:00.000-05:00

From the Frontrunner:

Former Florida professor Sami al Arian was acquitted yesterday on eight of 17 charges that he supported Palestinian terrorist attacks. Jurors deadlocked on the remaining counts, including those accusing al Arian of providing financial support to Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Codefendants Sameeh Hammoudeh and Ghassan Zayed Ballut were acquitted on all charges. Hatem Naji Fariz was acquitted of 24 counts, with jurors deadlocked on the remaining eight. The story received widespread news coverage, largely casting the verdict as a serious loss for federal prosecutors in a major case investigated with Patriot Act powers.

ABC World News Tonight (12/6, story 5, 1:15, Vargas) reported the verdict was "a significant defeat for federal officials trying to prosecute suspected terrorists under the so-called Patriot Act." ABC (Thomas) added the case "simply fell apart. This is a stinging defeat for the Justice Department. In February of 2003, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft called Sami al Arian a major terrorist and said the case shows what a powerful weapon the Patriot Act was. There were hours of secretly-recorded conversations. And more than 80 witnesses were called in a trial that lasted 6 months. On his way to jail, al Arian maintained his innocence, and basically said that the government's case was paper-thin, that there was no evidence he supported terrorist attacks. The jury clearly agreed. It was not buying what the government was selling." NBC Nightly News (12/06, story 4, :45, Williams) also notes the verdict is "being called a big defeat for federal prosecutors."

In a widely-distributed story, the AP (12/7) called the verdict "a stinging defeat for prosecutors" in "one of the biggest courtroom tests yet of the Patriot Act's expanded search-and-surveillance powers. ... 'While we respect the jury's verdict, we stand by the evidence we presented in court against Sami Al-Arian and his co-defendants,' Justice Department spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos said." The AP notes, "The Patriot Act gave the government greatly expanded powers and broke down the wall between foreign intelligence investigations and domestic law enforcement. In the Al-Arian case, officials said, it allowed separate FBI investigations...to be combined and all the evidence used against him. A male juror said he didn't see the case as a First Amendment issue as defense attorneys had claimed. He said it just came down to lack of proof."

In a front-page story, the Washington Post (12/7, Hsu, Eggen, 744K) reports jurors dealt "the U.S. government a setback in its efforts to use secretly gathered intelligence in criminal cases against terrorism suspects" under the Patriot Act. Scolinos said DOJ "stands by the charges and may retry al-Arian and Fariz. Noting recent convictions of two terrorism suspects in Northern Virginia and New York, Scolinos said: 'The Justice Department has a strong track record of success in prosecuting terrorists and those who support terrorist activities.'" The Los Angeles Times (12/7, Dahlburg, 958K) notes that the Patriot Act "provisions at issue in the Al-Arian case were considered noncontroversial, although the setback for the government is likely to result in further scrutiny of Justice Department claims that the tools are vital to defend the country."

American Justice Sytem Prevails Over Patriot Act

2005-12-06T18:02:00.000-05:00

In a stinging defeat for prosecutors, a former Florida professor accused of helping lead a terrorist group that has carried out suicide bombings against Israel was acquitted on nearly half the charges against him Tuesday, and the jury deadlocked on the rest.

The case against Sami Al-Arian, 47, had been seen as one of the biggest courtroom tests yet of the Patriot Act's expanded search-and-surveillance powers.

His indictment in 2003 was hailed by then-Attorney General John Ashcroft as one of the first triumphs of the Patriot Act, which was enacted in the weeks after Sept. 11.

Read the full article here:
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/13335396.htm

Possible Senate Filibuster Has Backing

2005-12-05T14:30:00.000-05:00

National Journal reports: “A majority of the Senate -- including 38 Democrats and 13 or 14 Republicans -- is prepared to support a filibuster of reauthorizing expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act unless significant changes are made…”

Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter says he is “pushing to change the sunset provisions for the most controversial provisions of the legislation to four years from the current seven.”

However, a Democratic aide told National Journal that the change in the controversial provision's expiration date will not be enough to end the filibuster threat.

From C-Span’s Congressional Glossary:
A Filibuster is the term used for an extended debate in the Senate which has the effect of preventing a vote. Senate rules contain no motion to force a vote. A vote occurs only once debate ends.

Some Senators Protecting Your Civil Liberties

2005-12-05T12:10:00.000-05:00

Washington Times commentator Nat Hentoff on the six U.S. Senators who derailed the Patriot Act’s Reuthoirization:
I salute the senators who insist on these and other vital changes in the Patriot Act: Republicans Larry Craig (Idaho), John Sununu (New Hampshire), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska); and Democrats Dick Durbin (Illinois), Russ Feingold (Wisconsin) and Ken Salazar (Colorado). Also, Sen. Arlen Specter, who refused to sign the conference committee report.

To their colleagues in both houses, I recommend advice from Alexander Hamilton (Federalist No. 8): "[T]he continual effort and alarm attendant on a state of continual danger will compel nations the most attached to liberty, to resort for repose and security to institutions which have a tendency to destroy their civil and political rights. To be more safe, they, at length become willing to run the risk to be less free."

Read the full article here:
http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20051204-102937-3793r.htm

The conference committee report referred to above is a reference to the House-Senate compromise Patriot Act reauthorization legislation.

Another Senator Sounds Off
Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT):"I still believe strongly that we should do what we can to ferret out the terrorists that put the country at risk, but not do so at the risk of basic rights of people in this country. It's not a question of choosing between doing what we can and making a choice about civil liberties. We're not flipping a coin here. The law enforcement agencies in this country can still do their job."

Read the full article here:
http://www.greenwichtime.com/news/local/scn-gt-patriot3dec04,0,2408907.story?coll=green-news-local-headlines

What Trouble’s These Senators?
David Broder of the Washington Post writes: "The issues are specific and significant: a requirement that the government convince a judge that a search of records has a direct connection, not just vague "relevance," to a suspected terrorist; a right of judicial appeal to challenge gag orders on such searches; a requirement that targets of "sneak-and-peek" searches be notified within seven days of their occurrence; and a four-year "sunset" clause for these special powers.

See the full article here:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002661012_broder04.html

Sen. Fiengold's Update on Patriot Act Status

2005-12-02T09:54:00.000-05:00

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI), the only member of the U.S. Senate to vote against the Patriot Act and a leader of the movement to secure your civil liberties, posted this to his blog yesterday:

"As I said, I will do everything I can to stop a bad bill. I am asking you to do the same and now is the time. Whether it's contacting your elected official, writing a letter to the editor in your local paper, or simply talking to your neighbors and coworkers, everyone needs to know that the time has come to let your voice be heard. We are in the final days of this uphill battle. The American people have been calling for a new look at the Patriot Act for four long years. It's time to get the job done right."

See the full post here:
http://usliberals.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/12/1/113522/827

Actions You Can Take Right Now
Click on the "Action Requested" button above to send a note to your Member of
Congress.

Visit this web page to send messages of concern about the Patriot Act to your local media outlets:
http://capwiz.com/cair/dbq/media/

Send e-mails to your friend, family and colleagues and point them to this blog.

Administration Restraint, Ohio, Effective Pressure

2005-12-01T14:26:00.000-05:00

Concern Over Administration’s Restraint
The editorial staff at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette expressed an opinion on the Patriot Act today:

“But because paranoia animates policy for this White House, the use of the Patriot Act is bound to go too far and impinge on basic civil liberties. This is an administration, after all, that feels threatened when Sen. John McCain and others want to outlaw torture.”

See the full article here:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05334/614391.stm

Ohio’s Patriot Act
From Ohio’s Free Times: “Do you like the idea of signing something akin to a loyalty oath to get a hunting license? Or being asked for ID not just to board a plane, but to enter an airport — or bus station? Then you’ll love Senate Bill 9.”

See the full article here:
http://www.freetimes.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=2833

Pressure for Change is Having an Effect
"Now, with pressure mounting to get the law passed by year end, business lobbyists say they see signs that key lawmakers are open to altering some provisions, offering companies clearer legal protections and avenues for appeal."

See the full article here:
http://mediachannel.org/blog/node/2127

More About National Security Letters

2005-12-01T13:45:00.000-05:00

Without any real oversight, a National Security Letter (NSL) can be issued by an FBI Field Supervisor. No judge, grand jury or prosecutor need be involved.

Private information about people who are not suspected of committing any crime can then be easily obtained.

The Washington Post has noted that under the “Patriot Act, and Bush administration guidelines for [NSL] use” the letters permit “clandestine scrutiny of U.S. residents and visitors who are not alleged to be terrorists or spies.”

The Associated Press recently reported that Assistant Attorney General William Moschella asserts “the claim that the FBI uses NSLs to spy on law-abiding Americans” is “false.” However, he acknowledges that “some people whose records are produced ‘may not be terrorists or spies or associated with terrorists or spies.’” The FBI can retain those records.

A single NSL can round up the records of large numbers of people.

You can see a PDF of a National Security Letter here:
http://action.aclu.org/nsl/legal/nsl_letter.pdf

Two important things to note on the NSL:

1) the issuing agent needed only to certify that the “information sought is relevant to an authorized investigation”
2) the recipient is prohibited from disclosing “to any person that the FBI has sought or obtained access to information or records”

You can easily send a note of concern about National Security Letters to your elected officials by click the “Action Requested” button at the top of this page.

Patriot Act Age gets its Rosa Parks?

2005-11-30T10:05:00.000-05:00

Recently, Deborah Davis was making her daily bus commute through the Federal Center in Lakewood, Colorado. As she sat in her seat, federal police asked to see her identification.

She refused. Passengers on public transportation are not required to carry identification.

Scripps Howard News Service quotes Davis’ reason for not showing her identification: "It's wrong…It's not even security. It's just a lesson in compliance - the big guys pushing the little guys around."

Defying abusive and intrusive power is a tradition in America that dates back at least to the Boston Tea Party.

Davis has a son serving in Iraq and another son who served in the Navy.

Davis will appear in court on December 9.

You can read all about the case here:
http://www.papersplease.org/davis/

See a Scripps Howard News Service article about the issue here:
http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=PRIVACY-11-29-05

Major Business Lobby Groups Voice Opposition

2005-11-30T09:51:00.000-05:00

In early October, business groups representing “some of the most powerful lobbying groups in [Washington, D.C.]” wrote a letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA) expressing troubles their concerns regarding the Patriot Act.

Signatory’s on the letter included the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, “which represents 3 million businesses” and the National Association of Realtors.

Their concern: “the Patriot Act makes it too easy for the government to get confidential business records.”

The letter notes that law enforcement, by merely saying it is conducting an ongoing investigation, can access “records about our customers or our employees, as well as our trade secrets and other proprietary information- can too easily be obtained and disseminated…”

See the whole article here:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1006-06.htm

As a business owner, you can write a similar letter. Send it to Sen. Arlen Specter and both of the U.S. Senators from your state.

Any letter to the Senate can be addressed to the following:
The Honorable (Full Name)
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Given the time limitation, it is best to fax the letter.

Sen. Specter’s fax number is (202) 228-1229

Find your Senators and their fax numbers here:
http://capwiz.com/cair/dbq/officials/

Where are We Now?

2005-11-29T09:53:00.000-05:00

CAIR is urging American Muslims and other people of conscience to continue voicing opposition to the unsupervised domestic surveillance powers contained in the USA Patriot Act. A House-Senate compromise renewing the Patriot Act was derailed just before Thanksgiving. The renewal process will be concluded within the next few weeks. Sixteen provisions of the Patriot Act are due to expire at the end of December.

Six Senators, three Republicans and three Democrats, announced their opposition to the late-November deal. Senate majority leader Bill Frist says he expects the legislation's Senate opponents will filibuster it if their civil liberties concerns are not addressed.

Two Patriot Act provisions of great concern are Sections 215 and 505.

Section 215 allows law enforcement to acquire a search warrant for "any tangible thing." It also forbids the warrant's recipient from telling anyone about the warrant. CAIR and other civil liberties groups support a Senate provision that would have required that the government show that a person whose records are sought has some connection to a terror suspect. Currently, law enforcement officials must merely say the records are needed for an ongoing investigation.

Under Section 505, National Security Letters (NSL) can be authorized by FBI field inspectors. NSLs allow access to such records as financial, business dealings, telephone calls, e-mails, web sites visited, and Internet searches. They do not require a judge's approval and are typically presented to employers or internet service providers who are then prohibited from informing anyone of the request, even their own lawyers. The Washington Post recently reported that a stunning 30,000 such letters are being issued annually.

IMMEDIATE ACTIONS REQUESTED:

1) Contact your elected representatives and ask them to ensure that any deal on the Patriot Act includes the following modifications:

a. Law enforcement authorities should be required to prove that a person whose records are sought has some connection to a terror suspect.

b. There must be a meaningful right to challenge Patriot Act orders.
Recipients of these orders should be allowed to share the information with their lawyers.

TO CONTACT YOUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES, GO TO:

http://capwiz.com/cair/issues/alert/?alertid=8278381&type=CO

2) Put your cell phone to good use.

Call all of your friends and family members and ensure that they contact their elected officials. Act as a facilitator. You can enter their zip code into our website at http://capwiz.com/cair/dbq/officials/ and get the names and contact information of their representatives (1 Member of the U.S. House and 2 Members of the U.S. Senate).

3) Push your community leaders to action.

Give your local Imam a copy of this release and ask him to use it as talking points for a Friday sermon. Ask if your local leaders and organizations can send this release over their e-mail lists.

4) Attend your senators' and representative's town meeting.

Congress is currently on Thanksgiving recess. Call your officials in-state offices and ask where they are slated to appear. Arrange for people to attend and urge the official to support the Patriot Act modifications discussed above.

5) Express your concern in a letter to the editor of your local newspaper.

A visit to the paper's website or a call to their office's will provide the details as to the right length for the letter (usually fairly short) and where to send it.