![](media/image1.png){width="1.1458333333333333in"
height="0.9583333333333334in"}

**The PATRIOT ACT**

I understand concerns that the USA PATRIOT (Uniting and Strengthening
America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and
Obstruct Terrorism) Act may go too far in enhancing the authority of law
enforcement agencies, particularly where electronic surveillance and
search warrant requirements are concerned.

On July 21, 2005, the House considered legislation to reauthorize 16
provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act that are set to expire on December 31,
2005. Although I voted against H.R. 3199, it passed the House by a vote
of 257 to 171.

***Background***

When the USA PATRIOT Act was enacted in the fall of 2001, the Bush
Administration and Republican House leadership were able to get passed
some of the more controversial components of the bill that granted
broader powers to law enforcement by adding a provision making 16 of
them sunset, or expire, this year.

***H.R. 3199***

The new bill, H.R. 3199, would make 14 of these provisions permanent.
The remaining two expiring provisions would sunset in 10 years,
including a measure concerning the authority to obtain \"roving\"
wiretaps and the so called \"library provision\" addressing
law-enforcement access to business records and tangible items, such as
customer records from libraries and bookstores.

I voted against the House bill because I continue to view the 16
provisions in the bill as short-term, emergency measures, designed to
give law enforcement authorities additional tools to combat terrorist
threats. These provisions expand law-enforcement powers where
surveillance and searches are concerned and constrict access to due
process. I believe we must be extremely circumspect about the long-term
or permanent expansion of such law-enforcement powers.

Furthermore, the fact that these 16 provisions were set to expire this
year has prompted greater congressional oversight of how the executive
branch has used its new authority than if the provisions had initially
been made permanent. Correspondingly, it has provided extra motivation
for the federal law enforcement community to police itself against
abuses and has forced a degree of accountability on the Bush
Administration. Establishing the provisions permanently in law would
eliminate these important checks on the abuse of power.

***Modifying the PATRIOT Act***

Since the USA PATRIOT Act was enacted, I have supported several
legislative initiatives to modify its reach. For instance, I am a
cosponsor of the Freedom to Read Act. This legislation would exempt
bookstores and libraries from the provision of the PATRIOT Act that
requires them to provide customer information for warrantless
intelligence investigations. When the House considered the Fiscal Year
(FY) 2006 Science, State, Justice, and Commerce Appropriations bill on
June 15, 2005, it considered an amendment to prevent the Justice
Department from spending any funds to enforce this provision. The
amendment passed the House with my support by a vote of 238 to 187. The
Senate has not yet considered its version of the bill. If this amendment
is retained in the final version of the bill, the \"library provision\"
of the PATRIOT Act would, in effect, be invalidated during FY 2006.

***What's ahead***

The Senate passed its version of the PATRIOT Act reauthorization bill on
July 29, 2005. The Senate bill would only provide a four-year sunset for
the roving wiretaps and library provisions rather than a 10-year renewal
and, in general, would impose more limitations on law enforcement
authority than the House bill. Like the House bill, however, the Senate
bill would make the remaining 14 provisions of the Patriot Act
permanent. The differences between the two bills will be worked out by a
conference committee comprised of House and Senate leaders. I will
continue to monitor developments related to the bill.