| By
Bay City News
 Two
San Francisco residents who are among the most powerful
figures in Congress had different reactions to the
proposed extension of the controversial USA Patriot
Act.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., supports a compromise
that would extend the Patriot Act including provisions
that give authorities expanded search and wiretap
abilities.
“The USA Patriot Act has helped strengthen our
nation’s efforts against terrorism, yet serious
and legitimate concerns about the law’s impact
on civil liberties remain,” Feinstein said.
“The bill approved by the Judiciary Committee
today should go a long way toward alleviating those
concerns. The changes made to the bill prevent law
enforcement and intelligence officials from going
on ‘fishing expeditions,’ but preserve
their ability to ferret out terrorist activities.
In my view, this bill represents a careful balance.
It is my hope that the bill ultimately signed into
law reflects the changes made to this bill.”
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco,
opposes continuing to allow the FBI and other law
enforcement agencies to use the expanded search and
wiretap abilities because she believes the Bush administration
has not cooperated with Congress in providing oversight
to prevent abuses of civil liberties.
“Most importantly, the bill before us fails
to ensure accountability. Again, when Congress voted
for this four years ago, members clearly understood
that it would be accompanied by strong congressional
oversight so that the implementation would not violate
our civil liberties,” Pelosi said.
“In fact, the attorney general has admitted
that the information on its use of the Patriot Act
has not been forthcoming to the Congress in a timely
manner. If not for the sunset provisions, there is
no doubt that Congress would not even receive the
insufficient information we have received to date.”
The Patriot Act was originally passed following the
Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks but a number of its
provisions, including the search and wiretap provisions,
expired after four years. Congress is now debating
whether to extend those provisions.
|
