Permanent Pat Act a done deal as Senate caves
Give Me Liberty - And Security, Too?
Although the Senate did tack on a few cosmetic improvements, such as an exemption for libraries from warrantless searches and a provision allowing victims of national security letters to challenge in court the automatic gag order attached to them, the bulk of the Act’s more objectionable provisions are now set to become permanent…. Apparently, there are only two possibilities in the minds of the Act’s Republican backers: a powerful police state, or mass extinction at the hands of terrorists. As US Senator James Bunning (Republican, Kentucky) explained, “civil liberties do not mean much when you are dead.”
Ah, finally the American sheeple can rest easy in the knowledge that Congress is looking out for our safety and security. No, the terrorists will not win while the US Congress is at the helm…or will they?
By pandering to the lowest common denominator and turning fear into a political hot potato, Republicans (and more than a few “cowardly lion” Democrats) in Congress have succeeded in passing the most sweeping curtailment of American civil liberties in our nation’s history. Ah, but we don’t want the terrorists questioning our resolve, do we? Far better that we give up a few liberties than to risk a terrorist walking into a Starbucks and blowing himself up, eh? (Would you like a venti Caramel Macchiato with your suicide bomb??)
Of course, the reality that the permanent Patriot Act may ultimately do nothing to prevent another 9.11 seems not to matter to anyone in Congress. They simply have to at least look as if they are doing SOMETHING to defeat terrorism, or otherwise they’ll have to answer questions from political opponents back home. This is a perfect example of why policy and emotion should be mutually exclusive. Unfortunately, this is Congress we’re talking about here, where reaction and pandering is a way of life…not to mention a way of ensuring job security.
Although the Senate did tack on a few cosmetic improvements, such as an exemption for libraries from warrantless searches and a provision allowing victims of national security letters to challenge in court the automatic gag order attached to them, the bulk of the Act’s more objectionable provisions are now set to become permanent….
Meanwhile, US Senator Arlen Specter (Republican, Pennsylvania), Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has spoken of holding hearings with a mind to creating new legislation that will undo some of the serious damage done to civil liberties and necessary checks on government power by the Pat Act.
Whether that will amount to more than a theatrical exercise might depend on how far Congress goes in investigating the Bush Administration’s illegal domestic spying racket via the NSA. House Republicans are likely to turn that into a whitewash, so there’s little chance that indignation will spill over into momentum useful for getting the Pat Act under control. Still, it could happen, and is an outcome worth hoping for, at least.
Sure, it could happen. Then again, I could be elected Queen of England. Let’s face it; Congress has to look as if they’re doing SOMETHING, even if all they are really doing is the equivalent of swinging at a pinata while blindfolded. They’re not going to actually hit anything, but those who aren’t paying attention will see the swinging and flailing and be lulled into believing that Congress is actually looking out for their interests and that they’re safe. All the American sheeple really care about is being safe. If it means giving up a few liberties here and there, well…you don’t want the terrorists to win, do you?
The problem with this line of thinking, though, is that we may well wake up one day and find ourselves living in the moral equivalent of a police state. So who says the terrorists aren’t winning?
