2008 Woodie Awards
Out of Right Field
The Patriot Act: If It Ain't Broke, Renew It
Kirsten Steinke
Issue date: 4/14/05 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 2 next >
With the upcoming renewal of the Patriot Act, liberals are learning the problems of relying on fear tactics and worst-case scenarios to form their party platform. When the Patriot Act was introduced 45 days after the events of September 11, liberals were up in arms. They claimed that, in the hysteria which followed the attacks, a hasty policy was being passed which impeded upon the civil liberties of American citizens. For the next four years, the very mention of the Patriot Act incited anger or demeaning scoffs from the left.
Now that this important piece of legislation is up for renewal, liberals cling to their same tired points of contention, all of which have been proven false during the years when the Patriot Act was in effect. The most controversial points of the legislation seem to the provisions that allow the FBI to expedite its proceedings by obtaining evidence before their search is authenticated by a court, the fear that governmental organizations would have access to information such as library and medical records, and the "delayed notification" policy in which the FBI is only required to provide a search warrant after searching a premises.
While much of the information regarding the use of the Patriot Act must be kept quiet, the Justice Department has released the following information. The power to seize personal records has been used 35 times, none of which involved medical, library, bookstore or gun sale records. In addition, the delayed notification search warrants have been used only 115 times.
The Justice Department also released information regarding specific instances when the Patriot Act has been used. In addition to preventing international terrorist attacks, the policy has been used to prevent many local acts of terrorism. For example, a leader of the Ku Klux Klan was prevented from purchasing grenades intended to bomb an abortion clinic, an arson attempt directed towards an Islamic center in Texas was thwarted, and a terror cell in Portland was destroyed.
Now that this important piece of legislation is up for renewal, liberals cling to their same tired points of contention, all of which have been proven false during the years when the Patriot Act was in effect. The most controversial points of the legislation seem to the provisions that allow the FBI to expedite its proceedings by obtaining evidence before their search is authenticated by a court, the fear that governmental organizations would have access to information such as library and medical records, and the "delayed notification" policy in which the FBI is only required to provide a search warrant after searching a premises.
While much of the information regarding the use of the Patriot Act must be kept quiet, the Justice Department has released the following information. The power to seize personal records has been used 35 times, none of which involved medical, library, bookstore or gun sale records. In addition, the delayed notification search warrants have been used only 115 times.
The Justice Department also released information regarding specific instances when the Patriot Act has been used. In addition to preventing international terrorist attacks, the policy has been used to prevent many local acts of terrorism. For example, a leader of the Ku Klux Klan was prevented from purchasing grenades intended to bomb an abortion clinic, an arson attempt directed towards an Islamic center in Texas was thwarted, and a terror cell in Portland was destroyed.