NEWS
Baldwin supports revision of USA PATRIOT Act
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Natalie J. Mikhail:
- FTC targets misleading diet ads (December 10, 2003)
- Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow (December 11, 2003)
- EPA proposes new clean air requirements (December 4, 2003)
- Flu vaccine falls short due to rumors of bad season on the way (December 9, 2003)
- Congressman speaks to regents (December 8, 2003)
Related Stories:
- Baldwin Speaks on the Patriot Act at the Memorial Union (April 15, 2004)
- Madison Public Library takes measures against USA Patriot Act (January 17, 2005)
- ACLU letter expresses concern about Patriot Act (October 16, 2003)
- SAFE Act counters some PATRIOT Act 'flaws;' Wiley: 'positive to focus on' (May 6, 2004)
- Congress reaches Patriot Act compromise (December 9, 2005)
Share This:
by Natalie J. Mikhail
Monday, September 29, 2003
U.S. Rep. Tammy Baldwin and 20 other Congressmen proposed a bill Wednesday that would repeal some of the USA PATRIOT Act powers that they said threaten basic liberties.
Among Patriot Act authorities that the bill would repeal are: secret “sneak and peak” searches without notifying property owners of the warrant beforehand, greater access to personal and education records, the jailing of immigrants who have not been convicted of a crime, and the allowance of the federal government to monitor attorney-client conversations in federal prisons without a court order.
“While it’s important for our law enforcement officials to have appropriate tools to protect Americans from terrorist acts, the USA PATRIOT Act and the proposals to expand it go too far, threatening our Constitutional liberties,” Baldwin said.
Baldwin also said checks and balances of government power are necessary, adding that secret surveillance and searches, denial of legal counsel, ignoring attorney-client privileges and searching library and medical records are not necessary to protect Americans.
However, other legislators say the Patriot Act is vital in order to fight the war against terrorism.
“It’s helping the fight against terrorism,” U.S. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner’s spokesman, Jeff Lungrun, said. “If you take these tools away from law enforcement right now, then they can’t fight it. It will make their job protecting [Americans] more difficult and likely to fail.”
Lungrun added that there has been a lot of “hype and miscommunication” about the Patriot Act, but one thing to remember is that the act passed overwhelmingly in the House of Representatives.
With heightened terrorist threats in the U.S., Sensenbrenner, chairman of the House Judiciary, said that now is not the time to consider appeals of this bill.
The Patriot Act was first introduced several days after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. It was rushed through Congress and passed the House on Oct. 24, 2001 by a vote of 357 to 66. The next day it passed the Senate by a vote of 98 to 1. Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin, was the only one to oppose the legislation. Pres. Bush signed it into law on Oct. 26, 2001.
However, it has received sharp criticisms lately from both Democrats and Republicans for its broad search-and-seizure provisions, the main arguments of H.R. 3171.
Supporters of the bill say getting the legislation through Congress could take a long time, but there is a strong possibility that it will be passed. They cited recent resolutions from 170 U.S. communities that condemned the Patriot Act.
Lungrun disagrees. He said this legislation has little chance of passing because it has very small amounts of support by “very liberal members.” He added that a lot of the provisions to which the Congressmen object are “sunset,” meaning they expire in 2005.
The bill will likely be reviewed by the House Judiciary committee, the Homeland Security committee and/or the Intelligence committee.
