USA Patriot and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2005

USA PATRIOT AND TERRORISM PREVENTION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2005 -- (House of Representatives - July 21, 2005)

BREAK IN TEXT

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 3199, the USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2005.

Following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, Congress undertook a review of Bush Administration proposals to strengthen our laws relating to counterterrorism. Congress passed the Patriot Act in October 2001--which I supported--recognizing that it needed to give law enforcement the proper tools to effectively combat new terrorist threats. The law took account of new changes in technology that are used by terrorists, such as cell phones, the Internet, and encryption technologies.

The original Act gives federal officials greater authority to track, intercept, and share communications, both for law enforcement and foreign intelligence gathering purposes. It vests the Secretary of the Treasury with regulatory powers to combat corruption of U.S. financial institutions for foreign money laundering purposes. It seeks to further close our borders to foreign terrorists and to detain and remove those within our borders. It creates new crimes, new penalties, and new procedural efficiencies for use against domestic and international terrorists. Indeed, the PATRIOT Act gives federal prosecutors many of the same tools to use against terrorists that Congress has already granted them to use against drug traffickers, for example.

The original Act also creates judicial safeguards for e-mail monitoring and grand jury disclosures; recognizes innocent owner defenses to forfeiture; and entrusts enhanced anti-money laundering powers to those regulatory authorities whose concerns include the well being of our financial institutions.

Congress did not grant all of the authority the President sought in the first Patriot Act, and sunsetted much of the Act's authority in 2005. Many of the wiretapping and foreign intelligence amendments sunset on December 31, 2005. The sunset provisions require Congressional oversight because Congress must take an affirmative action to keep these provisions in effect. I believe that Congress should exercise greater oversight of the use of new authority under the PATRIOT Act, as I have some misgivings about the Administration's use of the new powers under the PATRIOT Act.

Over the past few years I have continued to insist on greater oversight by Congress of the Justice Department as it executes its new powers. I am pleased that the Committee includes sunsets for two provisions: access to business and other records, and roving wiretaps. I support additional sunsets for other provisions in this legislation such as the ``sneak and peek'' provision which allows delayed notification for search warrants--and I am hopeful that the House will ultimately adopt the additional sunsets approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee when this bill returns from conference committee.

I am disappointed that the House leadership did not make in order amendments that would have: exempted library and bookstore records from Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) searches; reformed the roving wiretap authority in FISA cases to contain the same privacy safeguards as roving wiretaps in criminal cases; established the traditional FISA standards for search warrants; required individual suspicion for records orders; allowed citizens to challenge secrecy orders in records requests; and extended the sunset clauses for numerous other provisions of the Patriot Act.

I voted in favor of a number of bipartisan amendments to limit the Justice Department's power and increase Congressional and judicial oversight of the executive branch, including: requiring the FBI Director to personally approve searches of library or bookstore records; additional reporting to courts by law enforcement when they change surveillance locations under a ``roving wiretap''; allowing recipients of National Security Letters to consult with an attorney and challenge the letters in court; and increasing reporting requirements and making it more difficult to obtain ``sneak and peak''

[Page: H6247] GPO's PDF

search warrants, which entail secret searches of homes and offices with delayed notice.

We must not repeat the mistakes of the past, when the United States sacrificed the civil rights of particular individuals or groups in the name of security. Whether in times of war or peace, finding the proper balance between government power and the rights of the American people is a delicate and extremely important process. It is a task that rightly calls into play the checks and balances that the Founders created in our system of government. All three branches of government have their proper roles to play in making sure the line is drawn appropriately, as we upheld our oaths to support the Constitution.

I support H.R. 3199 but I hope as this legislation works its way through Congress, we will include sunsets on the provisions we are reauthorizing, so that Congress will continue to oversee the executive branch's use of these new powers.

BREAK IN TEXT

http://thomas.loc.gov