VOTE ALERT: Sanders Privacy Bill Draws Veto Threat

[Douglas Carpenter]

http://www.bernie.org

http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=80A75511-DC28-E526-AB5C8A04F3E64715
{http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=80A75511-DC28-E526-AB5C8A04F3E64715}

VOTE ALERT: Sanders Privacy Bill Draws Veto Threat

by David Sirota at: http://www.davidsirota.com/

{https://secure26.activehost.com/bernie/}In a preview of the kind of
gutsy moves he will take as a U.S. Senator, Vermont's Independent
Congressman Bernie Sanders is preparing to offer an amendment today
forcing the FBI to get a warrant before accessing citizens' reading
habits at libraries and bookstore purchases. The USA Patriot Act
allows the feds to do these kinds of searches with almost no judicial
oversight - Sanders amendment would simply modify that specific
provision to force more stringent checks on the federal government's
power. Unfortunately, even though the President publicly says "there
has got to be a certain sense of privacy," the White House is
threatening to veto the bill if the amendment passes.

In 2003, Sanders and a bipartisan group of lawmakers tried to raise
these same privacy concerns. The Justice Department opposed it,
claimed "We're not going after the average American" and that "we
respect the right to privacy" - and then refused to tell Congress how
often it had used these new powers to secretly spy on people's reading
habits. In fact, Judiciary Chairman Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI)
told the Associated Press "that the Justice Department was sharing so
little information, he could not assess how the Patriot Act was
working."

The numbers, however, have become clear. In a survey conducted by
researchers at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, about
550 libraries across the country reported receiving requests over the
past year from federal and local investigators for records of patrons.
Then-Attorney General John Ashcroft soon admitted that he had tripled
the use of these secretive searches without warrants.

The last time this was voted on, the House GOP leadership held open
the vote in the House for 23 minutes while arm-twisting their members
to vote against it. The measure lost on a 210-210 tie, meaning this
upcoming vote should be very close again, especially considering some
of the Democrats who didn't vote for it last time have since been
embarrassed into changing their position.

Let's be clear - no one is saying the FBI shouldn't be able to search
through library/bookstore purchase records when investigating
terrorists. All this measure says is that they should have to get a
traditional warrant from a judge to do so - not that hard to do if
the feds are investigating the kinds of awful and dangerous
terrorists they promise us they are.

This requirement, which the Patriot Act runs roughshod over, is what
makes our system different from a third-world police state: we have
checks on police power. Getting a real warrant is a pretty basic
requirement in a democratic society - and not too much to ask in
protecting Americans' civil liberties. Urge your Member of Congress
to support this amendment.

Sources: Sanders bill draws White House veto threat:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/14/AR2005061401211.html
{http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/14/AR2005061401211.html}
Bush says there needs to be "a certain sense of privacy":
http://www.davidsirota.com/2005/05/claim-vs-fact-bush-on-internet-privacy.html
{http://www.davidsirota.com/2005/05/claim-vs-fact-bush-on-internet-privacy.html}
Sensenbrenner says Congress given so little info:
http://bernie.house.gov/documents/articles/20030421102754.asp
{http://bernie.house.gov/documents/articles/20030421102754.asp} 550
libraries report federal requests:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A1481-2003Apr9
{http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A1481-2003Apr9}
Ashcroft triples use of secret searches:
http://talkleft.com/new_archives/001978.html
{http://talkleft.com/new_archives/001978.html} Sanders' bill
previously lost on a 210-210 tie:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37480-2004Jul8.html
{http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37480-2004Jul8.html}
Democrats who voted against Sanders have been embarrassed:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001979070_adamsmith14m.html
{http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001979070_adamsmith14m.html}