Providing for Consideration of H.R. 3199, USA Patriot and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2005
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3199, USA PATRIOT AND TERRORISM PREVENTION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2005 -- (House of Representatives - July 21, 2005)
BREAK IN TEXT
Mr. McGOVERN. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this restrictive rule, and I rise in opposition to the underlying bill. Protecting our homeland from another terrorist attack is among the most important priorities we face. We must support our law enforcement officials by providing them with the proper resources and modern technologies to combat terrorism. There is a delicate balance that must be maintained between security and liberty. I believe that this bill sacrifices too much of our liberty.
I know there is a lot of anguish in the House today about this bill. This morning's incidents on the London subway only serve to heighten that anxiety. But democracy takes courage, Mr. Speaker. It takes the courage not to abandon our most deeply held principles. It takes the courage not to subject our citizens to unwarranted intrusions into their privacy. It takes the courage to say to the terrorists, You will not succeed in changing our way of life.
Mr. Speaker, I hear all the time from all types of people that 9/11 has changed everything. I hope not, Mr. Speaker. I hope that those terrible attacks have not served to undermine our Constitution, to weaken our respect for civil liberties, to chip away at the values that not only make this country unique but also make us a beacon of hope for the rest of the world. While the government should be provided with the necessary resources to protect the homeland, it should not be given a free pass to threaten and abuse the rights and liberties of our own citizens. Safeguards are key, and Congress in its vital function of oversight is one of government's most important safeguards.
Many of the provisions in the PATRIOT Act were sunsetted back in 2001 so that Congress could evaluate and fix them if necessary. These time limits on certain provisions serve as critical checks on the executive branch. They serve as a reminder that Congress is paying attention and that if the new powers are abused, they will not be renewed. We know from our own history that abuses of law enforcement powers are all too common. We must remember the wiretaps and secret surveillance on leaders in the civil rights and antiwar movements, and we must vow to never let those abuses happen again.
Some of the powers granted to the executive branch in this bill are simply too broad: secret surveillance of library and bookstore records; roving wiretaps; sneak-and-peek searches; and overly broad subpoena power. However, I realize there is little chance of removing the majority of these dangerous provisions from this bill. At the very least, I urge my colleagues to fulfill their responsibilities and vote to sunset all of these provisions again for a short period of time.
Further, since the PATRIOT Act was adopted, Congress has received far too little information about its uses. How can we make these provisions permanent when the Department of Justice, FBI, and other government agencies will not report to Congress or the American people how these provisions are being implemented?
Mr. Speaker, privacy is not a convenient luxury. It is a fundamental right. We need a bill that achieves the appropriate balance between liberty and security, a bill that combats terrorism vigilantly, but that is also consistent with the rights and liberties provided in the Constitution of the United States. In my opinion, this bill is not it. I fear that if this bill becomes law, a part of our tree of liberty will die.
I urge my colleagues to oppose this restrictive rule, and I urge my colleagues to oppose the legislation.
BREAK IN TEXT
http://thomas.loc.gov