The Obama administration has announced its plan to extend three key provisions of the Patriot Act, making way for what is bound to be a reheated debate over privacy and anti-terrorism laws.
Due to expire on December 31 of this year, the Justice Department advised Congress to renew sections that would grant them the authority to access business and library records, conduct roving wiretaps aimed at suspects who attempt to dodge surveillance, and operate investigations into “lone wolf” terrorists; that is, investigate terrorists not suspected of having allegiance to a known foreign government or terrorist organization.
The Patriot Act was passed in response to the September 11 terrorist attacks and was heavily opposed as being an infringement upon citizens’ privacy. Despite the controversy it generated, proponents of the statute viewed it as a vital and necessary tool in combating terrorism.
Yet the American Civil Liberty Union, the most vociferous critic of the act, has urged Congress to utilize the upcoming expiration date as an opportunity to narrow the act’s provisions. The ACLU’s Legislative Counsel claims that, “over the last eight years, Congress has allowed numerous expansions of executive authority that have worked in tandem to infringe upon Americans’ rights.” Now, Obama seeks to renew the very same law that was so intensely criticized under President Bush.
As a senator in 2006, Obama voted to reauthorize the Patriot Act. However, he opposed conditions that pertained to wiretapping, specifically those which allowed FBI agents to tap multiple phones or computers, especially phones whose numbers had recently been changed. Moreover, as a presidential candidate in 2008, Obama expressed that his previous experience in constitutional law would render him more likely to examine the legality of the statute, thus implying he would likely not support a mandate that allowed wiretapping. Now, as President, Obama seeks to renew the very same provision that was so intensely criticized under President Bush and that he himself once voted against.
So what does this apparent contradiction tell us? Perhaps it is an indication that Obama’s views regarding national security have changed since taking the oath of office. After all, it is the primary and constitutionally mandated responsibility of the President of the United States to safeguard our country and her borders. Furthermore, he is now briefed daily and has access to top secret intelligence that he never had before. One can only assume that this information has led Obama to realize the reality and seriousness that terrorism poses, and that perhaps wiretapping is a useful instrument in combating terrorists and future attacks.
Upon the Patriot Act’s initial introduction and passage, Democrats strongly criticized the Republican Congress and President Bush. Now with a Democrat in the White House who supports the statute, and Democrats in Congress who oppose it, one can only guess how the upcoming debate will play out.
The view from the Oval Office can look very different from the view of a candidate or a legislator, and it seems this new perspective is causing Obama to stray from the platform and the party that, once upon a time, helped him get elected.
Loading ...