Extending Counterterrorism Authorities

Floor Speech

* Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, the new majority in the House has told us that the decisions they make will be guided by two things. First, loyalty to the Constitution. And second, a belief that the government is too large and too intrusive.

* Well, here is their chance to act on those principles. The PATRIOT Act provisions we're voting on today represent Big Brother at its creepiest and most invasive. They are a clear violation of the 4th Amendment's ``right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.''

* Its been close to a decade now that we've lived under the PATRIOT Act. For close to a decade, we've been told that our individual freedoms needed to take a backseat. For close to a decade, we've been told that our civil liberties must be shredded in the name of a so-called war on terrorism. We've been told that the national security imperatives of the moment are so great--and so different than any we've faced in our history--that we must submit to roving wiretaps, that we must empower the government to obtain ``any tangible thing'' related to a terrorism investigation.

* ``Any tangible thing''--that gives the government pretty broad discretion to ferret out just about whatever it is that they want. It is an invitation to overreach and abuse.

* Meanwhile, it's not at all clear that the PATRIOT Act has made us safer. I believe it has stifled freedom more than it has advanced it. There is a real incoherence to an approach that says we have to do violence to our values in order to protect them. Benjamin Franklin's words are just as powerful today as they were more than 200 years ago: ``Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.''

* I was impressed that so many members of the majority, in particular those just elected, voted against this measure when it came up on the suspension calendar earlier this week. I strongly urge them to do so again, and I hope they will be joined by more of their Republican colleagues who claim such a passionate belief in modest government. Or do they want to be known as the party that believes we should be tapping Americans' phones but not giving them affordable health care?

* I believe we must let these provisions expire. And let's not stop there. Let's move toward a fuller debate about civil liberties and national security, one that revises and ultimately repeals the PATRIOT Act once and for all. This law is Constitutional graffiti. Patriotism means affirming and celebrating the values that have given America its strength and vitality for more than two centuries. A bill that violates several constitutional amendments has no business calling itself the PATRIOT Act.

Source