Debate over Patriot Act to be spirited

WASHINGTON – A lively national debate over the USA Patriot Act is about to unfold as supporters and critics of the anti-terrorism law ready arguments to keep or scale back key portions.

More than a dozen provisions of the controversial act dealing with law enforcement’s enhanced spying powers will expire Dec. 31 unless Congress renews them. The Senate Judiciary Committee is holding its first of three hearings on Tuesday, with the House judiciary panel taking up the issue the following day and continuing with eight more sessions.

Meanwhile, a bipartisan coalition of conservatives and civil libertarians critical of the law plans an aggressive lobbying effort featuring town hall meetings across the country.

President Bush and members of his administration are imploring lawmakers to preserve the act. They have said it has proved effective since the Sept. 11 attacks by broadening the circumstances in which telephone wiretaps, surveillance and other methods can be used to investigate suspected terrorists.

“The Patriot Act has addressed critical vulnerabilities in America’s pre-September 11 defenses,” Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told a meeting of county government officials.

Gonzales and other supporters say there have been no verified claims of civil rights abuses under the act, which was signed into law a month after the attacks. “I would just ask people to look at the facts, and the facts are the Patriot Act has kept us safer,” said Senate Judiciary Committee member John Cornyn, R-Texas. “Notwithstanding all the noise we’ve heard from some groups, there’s been no instance of its abuse.”

In a report last July, the Justice Department said the act has helped it charge more than 300 defendants with criminal offenses in terrorism investigations.

Opinion polls have shown a majority of the public supports the act. A Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll last April found 53 percent of those surveyed backed extending it – roughly the same percentage as those who said they believed the act was good for America. That figure was nearly twice the percentage who said they considered it bad for the country.

But critics – including liberal Democrats, some conservatives and civil rights activists suspicious of government power – say many sections should be curtailed or eliminated outright. “The government always asks for too much power after a crisis,” said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform and an influential White House ally. “There’s no shame in saying, ‘We asked for too much and now we’re giving some back.’ Then the message isn’t, ‘The Bush administration overreached,’ but, ‘All administrations overreach.’ It makes them more credible.”

Norquist is among the conservatives involved in a new coalition called Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances, formed to focus the anti-Patriot Act lobbying effort. Members include the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Conservative Union and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

“This will be the year that determines for the rest of our lives whether we can be successful in getting a handle on the growth of government power,” said former Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga., the coalition’s chairman and an outspoken Patriot Act critic. Barr and other critics dismiss the claim that there have been no abuses of the act, saying too much remains secret about how extensively the Justice Department has conducted searches or seized records. Other critics said some Patriot Act provisions that the Justice Department says have gone unused – including one enabling the FBI to obtain records, such as public library records, by specifying to a court that they are sought for an ongoing terrorism investigation – remain tempting to overzealous prosecutors.

“There’s a growing recognition that while some sections have never been used, they still sit there for an abusive attorney general in the future,” said Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho. “We’ve got a large body of America nervous about that.”

More than 370 local, county and state governments in 43 states have passed resolutions opposing the act, according to the ACLU.

Craig led a bipartisan group of senators who in 2003 introduced a bill that would place more restrictions on roving wiretaps, require law enforcement officials to notify targets of “sneak and peek” searches within seven days after a search, and amend the section that could permit obtaining library records. Rep. C.L. “Butch” Otter, R-Idaho, is expected to introduce similar legislation in the House.

Thomas Mann, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank, said the current political climate probably gives Bush the upper hand in the debate. “In this case, security trumps freedom,” Mann said. “On the other hand, a substantial number of members on both sides of the aisle have real civil libertarian and privacy concerns that will ensure some real give and take.”

“This is going to provoke a lot of debate,” Cornyn said.