Congress has Allowed Terrorists to Attack our Freedoms
Freedom is Slavery
Anti-terrorism bills should be rejected for 'recycled police state-style snooping'
Libertarian Party Press Releases , October 16, 2001
WASHINGTON, DC -- The anti-terrorism bills just passed by the House and Senate will allow the government to secretly search your home, spy on bank accounts around the world, and monitor your e-mail -- provisions that Congress has rejected before and that Americans overwhelmingly oppose, the Libertarian Party said today.
"These bills could be called 'Spying on Americans: The Sequel,' " said Steve Dasbach, national director of the Libertarian Party. "It appears that politicians are trying to use terrorism as an excuse for imposing anti-privacy measures that the American public has soundly rejected in the past. That's not just wrong -- it's unpatriotic."
This week, the U.S. House and U.S. Senate are working to reach agreement about conflicting provisions of two anti-terrorism bills: The USA Act, passed by the Senate on Thursday (by a 96-1 vote), and The PATRIOT Act, passed by the House on Friday (337-79).
A conference committee is working to resolve the differences between the two bills, and President Bush is expected to sign the final version by week's end.
Both bills dramatically expand law enforcement agencies' power to conduct searches, wiretaps, and other forms of electronic surveillance -- and those provisions should be stripped out of the final bill, said Dasbach.
"Politicians claim they're struggling to 'strike a balance between liberty and safety' in the fight against terrorism," he said. "Here's a simple rule to follow when trying to strike that balance: Don't turn an anti-terrorism bill into a Christmas tree, festooned with all sorts of anti-privacy regulations that have been rejected before."
The USA Act or the PATRIOT Act would:
Allow "sneak-and-peak" searches.
"In June 2000, the Senate unanimously passed the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act (HR 2987), which had originally contained a secret search provision," said Dasbach. "It would have allowed police to break into your home while you were away, take photos or copy your computer files -- and not tell you about the search until later.
"After a public outcry, that provision was stripped from the bill. But apparently Senators can't take 'No Secret Searches' for an answer, because they've slipped the sneak-and-peak provision into their 243-page USA Act. It was wrong in 2000, and it is wrong now. It should be rejected."
Authorize "Know Your Customer"-style bank spying.
"Back in 1998, more than 275,000 angry Americans stopped an attempt by the FDIC to force banks to spy on their own customers, and report any so-called unusual financial activity to the federal government," said Dasbach.
"Obviously, politicians can't take No (Your Customer) for an answer, because this program is back -- and it's gone global. The Senate bill would force banks in other countries to monitor their customers.
"But if the government doesn't have any business spying on you, why should it use your tax money to spy on people in foreign countries? Federally mandated bank spying was wrong in 1998, and it is wrong now. It should be rejected."
Expand the Carnivore e-mail surveillance scheme.
"Last year, the FBI admitted it was secretly using the Carnivore e-mail cyber-snooping system -- which allowed it to scan millions of e-mail messages. Americans were outraged, and forced Congress to hold hearings and the FBI to agree to limit its use," said Dasbach.
"Now, both the House and Senate bills contain provisions that could expand the use of Carnivore-style surveillance without a court order. But spying on the e-mail messages of millions of innocent Americans was wrong in 2000, and it is wrong now. It should be rejected."
What both anti-terrorism bills have in common, said Dasbach, is that they would require Americans to give up fundamental civil liberties because the government claims it would help fight terrorists.
And both contain controversial provisions that have been debated before -- and rejected.
"Libertarians share the desire to punish terrorists for their bloody attack on the United States," said Dasbach. "But that goal can be achieved without inflicting collateral damage on Americans' privacy with these provisions, which are nothing but recycled police state-style snooping.
"As Congress debates these bills, Americans need to remember: The terrorists destroyed the World Trade Center, but they didn't destroy our Constitution. Only politicians can do that. We can't allow it."
Related Articles:
About.com - Congress Approves Police Powers Bill despite concerns that the legislation destroys civil liberties.
cnn.com - PC World poll highlights privacy concerns. (October 8, 2001)
