After delays and extensions and delays and extensions, the USA Patriot Act has been renewed by a vote of 89 to 10.
The 89-10 vote marked a bright spot in President Bush’s troubled second term as his approval ratings dipped over the war in Iraq and his administration’s response to Hurricane Katrina. Renewing the act, congressional Republicans said, was key to preventing more terror attacks in the United States.
Bush, in a statement issued by the White House while he was in India, applauded the Senate for what he said were attempts by Democrats to block the bill’s passage.
“This bill will allow our law enforcement officials to continue to use the same tools against terrorists that are already used against drug dealers and other criminals, while safeguarding the civil liberties of the American people,” he said.
Critics maintained the bill is weighted too much toward the interests of law enforcement.
The House was expected to pass the legislation next week and send it to Bush, who would sign it before 16 provisions expire March 10.
A December filibuster led by Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., and joined by several libertarian-leaning Republicans, forced the Bush administration to agree to modest new curbs on government power.
This isn’t your fathers Patriot Act anymore. Now it’s Patriot Act Lite.
The White House and the Republicans broke the stalemate by crafting a second measure that would curb some powers of law enforcement officials seeking information. Both will be sent as a package to Bush.
This second bill — in effect an amendment to the measure renewing the 16 provisions — would add new protections to the 2001 antiterror law in three areas. It would:
• Give recipients of court-approved subpoenas for information in terrorist investigations the right to challenge a requirement that they refrain from telling anyone.
• Eliminate a requirement that an individual provide the FBI with the name of a lawyer consulted about a National Security Letter, which is a demand for records issued by investigators.
• Clarify that most libraries are not subject to demands in those letters for information about suspected terrorists.
Don’t many public libraries offer computer terminals with free Internet access? Wouldn’t it be easy for someone to use these computers to communicate to suspected terrorists? Yeah, that’s what I thought.
It’s good that the act passed, even in it’s ‘lite’ form, but the deeper issue remains. In this post 9/11 world, can we afford to skimp on security? I suppose we can, until of course, the next terrorist act occurs.