Appointment of Conferees on H.R. 3199, USA Patriot and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2005

APPOINTMENT OF CONFEREES ON H.R. 3199, USA PATRIOT AND TERRORISM PREVENTION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2005 -- (House of Representatives - November 09, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding, and I urge my colleagues to vote for this important motion to instruct on the PATRIOT Act. Like so many, I voted for the PATRIOT Act the first time and the second time. But I agree with the gentleman from California and the gentleman from Virginia, and as I understand it, perhaps the chairman as well. I simply do not understand the reticence to include sunset provisions on a law that affects the civil liberties of every American citizen.

In fact, when we reauthorized the PATRIOT Act in July, the Republican bill permanently authorized 14 of the 16 provisions. The other two provisions, one for roving wiretaps and the other dealing with the FBI's power to demand business records, were extended for 10 years. Democrats fought to sunset these provisions last summer; and we do so again today, apparently successfully, because, I think, people have, upon reflection, thought that this is a better policy. Because when it comes to the government's power to intrude on the private lives of citizens, the United States Congress should not give the government unchecked power to do so.

Just last Sunday the Washington Post documented, and it has been referenced here, the hundredfold increase in the issuance of national security letters seeking information about U.S. citizens and visitors who are not even alleged to be terrorist or spies. There are terrorists. Terrorism is a serious threat, and we need to be serious in our response. But privacy concerns must not be casually dismissed. In fact, it was not until several sections of the PATRIOT Act were set to expire that the Justice Department began to respond to congressional inquiries and we had the opportunity to assess, examine, and recalibrate our policies.

I submit to my colleagues they have given the Justice Department carte blanche. No matter how good the leadership is in the Justice Department, it is not a policy that we ought to pursue and would be an abdication of our congressional oversight responsibility and contrary to the interests of the American people.

Madam Speaker, this motion would recede to the Senate and create a 4-year sunset on the most controversial provisions in the PATRIOT Act, orders by the secret Foreign Intelligence Court, blank wiretap orders and the surveillance of agents of a foreign power who act alone. This motion, in my opinion, is a step in the right direction, and I hope the Members support it.

As I said, and I will echo the comments of so many here, terrorism is an immediate and proximate threat, as we lawyers say; and we need to respond effectively to keep America safe. But in the process, we must also protect the basic rights that our Founding Fathers knew were the bedrock of the United States democracy.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov