Patriot Sunsets Extension Act of 2011 - Motion to Proceed

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, we find ourselves again in the situation of extending key provisions of the PATRIOT Act. These three provisions are roving wiretaps, section 215 business record orders, and the lone wolf provisions. These are all very important tools used to investigate and prevent terrorist attacks. They have been reauthorized a number of times, but it seems that in recent years we have been discussing only very short term extensions of these critical tools.

That is why I will support the cloture motion on moving to S. 1038 today. This legislation provides a 4-year extension of the three expiring provisions without any substantive changes to the existing authorities, and I believe there do not need to be changes to existing authorities.

Regardless of my support for today's cloture vote, and support for the 4-year extension, I wish my colleagues to know that I support a permanent extension of the three expiring provisions. Having this debate year after year offers little certainty to agents utilizing these provisions to combat terrorism. It also leads to operational uncertainty, jeopardizes collection of critical intelligence, and could lead to compliance and reporting problems if the reauthorization occurs too close to the expiration of the law, and we are getting very close to that.

If we believe these tools are necessary--and I clearly stated I believe they are necessary--we need to provide some certainty as opposed to simply revisiting the law year after year. Given the indefinite threat we face from acts of terrorism, it is my view that we should permanently reauthorize these three expiring provisions.

This position is supported by agents on the ground using these tools every day. I have letters of support from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Agents Association supporting a permanent reauthorization of the three expiring provisions. The Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association also supports a permanent extension of the provisions. In fact, a very important passage of that letter states:

Crimes and terrorism will not sunset and are still targeting our nation and American citizens. Just like handcuffs, the PATRIOT Act should be a permanent part of the law enforcement arsenal.

Then we have another letter from the Society of Former Special Agents of the FBI, and that letter says:

We urge Congress to reauthorize the expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act permanently and without restrictions as the three expiring provisions are essential to the security of our country.

I ask unanimous consent that these letters be printed in the Record.

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, in addition to agents on the ground, we have heard strong support for extending the expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act from members of the Bush and Obama administrations. We have heard testimony from the Director of the FBI, the Attorney General, and the Director of National Intelligence about the strong need to reauthorize these provisions. These same offices have recommended extending the provisions regardless of political ideology as both Republican and Democratic administrations have backed the extensions.

The 4-year extension we are voting on today is a step in the right direction. Extending the three expiring provisions without any substantive amendment that would restrict or curtail the use of these tools is very important, given the recent actions that led to the death of Osama bin Laden. Now is not the time to place new restrictions and heighten evidentiary standards on critical national security tools.

A lot has been said about these provisions and, unfortunately, most of what has been said is incorrect. Congress enacted these provisions and reauthorized them in 2005 following the 9/11 Commission Report, which criticized the way our agents failed to piece together clues; in other words, to connect the dots. Since that time, the three expiring provisions have provided a great deal of information to agents who have helped thwart terrorist attacks.

Let's be very basic. What is terrorism about? It is about killing people living in Western Europe and North America. They don't like us, they want to kill us, and we have to prevent that. They can make continuous mistakes and not get their job done, but once the FBI makes a mistake and lets one of them get away it is a victory for the opposition. We can't afford a failure.

Examples along the lines that we can't have these failures: In testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, Robert Litt, the general counsel of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, testified that a section 215 order was used as part of the investigation by the FBI into Khalid Aldawasare, who was arrested in Texas recently. It was later revealed in a criminal case that he was purchasing explosive chemicals and bombmaking components online and had scouted targets in Texas.

Mr. Litt also testified that section 215 orders were utilized to obtain hotel records in the case where a suspected spy had arranged lodging for intelligence officers. He also discussed the roving wiretap provision and how it is used to help agents track foreign agents operating inside the United States who switch cellular phones frequently to avoid being caught. These examples are limited not because the authorities aren't valuable, but because of how sensitive the investigations are that utilize these authorities.

While the need for keeping personal and national security matters classified may prevent the open discussion of further examples in this setting--on the floor of the Senate--it is important to note that these provisions are constantly under strict scrutiny by the inspector general at the Department of Justice and by congressional oversight. In fact, in a March 2008 report, the Justice Department inspector general examined the FBI's use of section 215 orders and found: ``We did not identify any illegal use of section 215 authority.'' Further, there are no reported abuses of the roving surveillance authority, and the lone wolf provision has not yet been utilized, so it is without abuse as well.

While I agree these three provisions should be subject to strict scrutiny from inspectors general and Congress, that oversight authority already exists in the law and does not require amendments to these tools to achieve the goal of oversight. As such, it is important that Congress reauthorize these provisions quickly and without amendment.

I urge my colleagues to vote in support of the cloture motion on the motion to proceed to S. 1038 because it provides a clean reauthorization of these very vital tools for 4 years without substantive changes. In other words, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. While 4 years is a far cry from the permanence that I believe is necessary on these provisions, it does provide more certainty and predictability than continuing to pass short-term extension after extension.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source