|
In opposition to the Protect America Act
Statement of Ron Paul on H.R. 5104
A bill to extend the Protect America Act of 2007 for 30 Days
30 January 2008
By Rep. Ron Paul, M.D.
Madame Speaker, I rise in opposition to the extension of the
Protect America Act of 2007 because the underlying legislation
violates the US Constitution.
The mis-named Protect America Act allows the US government to
monitor telephone calls and other electronic communications of
American citizens without a warrant. This clearly violates the
Fourth Amendment, which states:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,
shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon
probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and
particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized.”
The Protect America Act sidelines the FISA Court system and
places authority over foreign surveillance in the director of
national intelligence and the attorney general with little if
any oversight. While proponents of this legislation have argued
that the monitoring of American citizens would still require a
court-issued warrant, the bill only requires that subjects be
"reasonably believed to be outside the United States ." Further,
it does not provide for the Fourth Amendment protection of
American citizens if they happen to be on the other end of the
electronic communication where the subject of surveillance is a
non-citizen overseas.
We must remember that the original Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act was passed in 1978 as a result of the U.S.
Senate investigations into the federal government’s illegal
spying on American citizens. Its purpose was to prevent the
abuse of power from occurring in the future by establishing
guidelines and prescribing oversight to the process. It was
designed to protect citizens, not the government. The effect
seems to have been opposite of what was intended. These recent
attempts to “upgrade” FISA do not appear to be designed to
enhance protection of our civil liberties, but to make it easier
for the government to spy on us!
The only legitimate “upgrade” to the original FISA legislation
would be to allow surveillance of conversations that begin and
end outside the United States between non-US citizens where the
telephone call is routed through the United States . Technology
and the global communications market have led to more foreign to
foreign calls being routed through the United States . This
adjustment would solve the problems outlined by the
administration without violating the rights of US citizens.
While I would not oppose technical changes in FISA that the
intelligence community has indicated are necessary, Congress
should not use this opportunity to chip away at even more of our
constitutional protections and civil liberties. I urge my
colleagues to oppose this and any legislation that violates the
Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2008/cr013008h.htm
Click on "comments" below to read or post comments
Comment Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and
relevant to the story.
We encourage engaging, diverse
and meaningful commentary. Do not include
personal information such as names, addresses,
phone numbers and emails. Comments falling
outside our guidelines – those including
personal attacks and profanity – are not
permitted.
See our complete
Comment Policy
and
use this link to notify us if you have concerns
about a comment.
We’ll promptly review and remove any
inappropriate postings.
Send Page To a Friend
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|
