Conservative Voices Against the USA PATRIOT Act
Todd Lakey, Canyon County Republican Chairman (“Idaho GOP for limits on the Patriot Act,” The Spokesman-Review, 6/15/2004)
“We want to support our preside, and we want to fight terrorism throughout the world, but we also want to be careful of our personal liberties.”
State Rep. Janet Miller (R-Boise) (“Idaho GOP for limits on the Patriot Act,” The Spokesman-Review, 6/15/2004)
“The Patriot Act was a very good idea. I think they just wrote it so hastily that they maybe went more in-depth than they should have done. We, of course, in Idaho really believe in personal freedom and not having the government meddle in our lives, so I think taking another look at it is a good idea.”
Idaho GOP platform plank (“Idaho GOP for limits on the Patriot Act,” The Spokesman-Review, 6/15/2004)
“The Patriot Act is necessary to facilitate the cooperation between law enforcement agencies. We support appropriate amendments to limit the incursion upon personal freedoms, rights, and liberties of American citizens.”
Harry Schneider, Legislative Chairman, Pennsylvania Sportsman's Association. ("Administration policies prompt some gun owners to recoil," Associated Press, 4/14/04)
"Most gun owners are not very enthusiastic and they’re very apprehensive about aspects of the Patriot Act, specifically about search-and-seizure rules. They’re just not going to dig into their wallets or devote their time to help Bush."
Kevin Starrett, Executive Director, Oregon Firearms Federation ("Gun Groups May Not Be Bush Campaign Weapon," Los Angeles Times, 4/13/04)
"Had the Clinton administration proposed the Patriot Act, which is a real scary thing for gun owners, the Republican-controlled Congress would have been apoplectic."
Bob Barr, former Republican member of Congress (“Patriot Act divides Bush loyalists,” Washington Times, 4/5/2004)
“The Fourth Amendment is a nuisance to the administration, but the amendment protects citizens and legal immigrants from the government's monitoring them whenever it wants, without good cause -- and if that happens, it’s the end of personal liberty.”
“I don’t care if there were no examples so far. We can’t say we'll let government have these unconstitutional powers in the Patriot Act because they will never use them. Besides, who knows how many times the government has used them? They’re secret searches.”
Larry Pratt, Executive Director, Gun Owners of America (Coalition for Constitutional Liberties Weekly Update, Free Congress Foundations, 2/27/2004)
“Anytime the government is in a conflict, they see it as an opportunity to aggrandize themselves and run roughshod over the Constitution”
“More laws are being made making things illegal. All of us stand to be in violation of some law.”
“Farmers [including some who were wielding guns] participated in civil disobedience at the site of the main water valve. [Under the PATRIOT Act,] The Klamath farmers would have been a terrorist organization.”
On the membership of Gun Owners of America:
“They see the Bill of Rights and defense of freedom as seamless”
“The government feels that we, the people, need to be transparent. It should be the other way around.”
Rep. Chris Chocola (R-IN-2) (“Bush gets ‘high marks’,” South Bend Tribune, 1/21/2004)
[Chocola held back an immediate endorsement of the president's call for renewal of the Patriot Act when it expires next year]
“That's a debate we’ve got to have.”
Rep. Richard Pombo (R-CA-11) (“Feedback to the state of the union address,” Contra Costa Times, 1/24/2004)
“I think Congress will spend more time debating the Patriot Act, or any reauthorization of the Patriot Act. We passed it originally in a time of crisis. I have concerns about provisions in the Patriot Act, particularly when it comes to protecting the privacy of the average American citizen.”
Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), Chair of the House Judiciary Committee (“Inside Politics,” Washington Times, 1/23/2004)
Mr. Sensenbrenner, a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, said “over my dead body” will the act be reauthorized without undergoing thorough re-examination in hearings held by the House.
Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the House ("The Policies of War: Refocus the mission," San Francisco Chronicle, 11/11/03)
"We must ensure that the legal tools provided are not abused, and indeed, that they do not undermine the very foundation our country was built upon."
"I strongly believe the Patriot Act was not created to be used in crimes unrelated to terrorism."
"Recent reports, including one from the General Accounting Office, however indicate that the Patriot Act has been employed in investigations unconnected to terrorism or national security.
In our battle against those that detest our free and prosperous society, we cannot sacrifice any of the pillars our nation stands upon, namely respect for the Constitution and the rule of law. Our enemies in the war against terrorism abuse the Islamic law known as the Sharia that they claim to value. It is perversely used as justification for their horrific and wanton acts of violence.
We must demonstrate to the world that America is the best example of what a solid Constitution with properly enforced laws can bring to those who desire freedom and safety. If we become hypocrites about our own legal system, how can we sell it abroad or question legal systems different than our own?
I strongly believe Congress must act now to rein in the Patriot Act, limit its use to national security concerns and prevent it from developing "mission creep" into areas outside of national security.
Similarly, if prosecutors lack the necessary legislation to combat other serious domestic crimes, crimes not connected to terrorism, then lawmakers should seek to give prosecutors separate legislation to provide them the tools they need, but again not at the expense of civil rights. But in no case should prosecutors of domestic crimes seek to use tools intended for national security purposes.
This war against terrorism requires Americans and American institutions to have the "courage to be safe," this courage must include keeping to the American principles that have made this country great for more than 200 years."
Rep. C.L. "Butch" Otter (R-ID) ("Otter to speak on Patriot Act dissent," Idaho State Journal, 11/9/2003)
"You cannot give up freedom, you cannot give up liberty, and be safe. When your freedom is lost, it makes no difference who took it away from you. (The terrorists) have won. What did they want to do? Take away our freedom. They've won in some cases."
Senator Larry Craig (R-ID), member of the Senate Judiciary Committee (“Senators join forces to roll back parts of Patriot Act,” Washington Times, 10/16/03)
[On the introduction of the Security and Freedom Ensured (SAFE) Act]
“This has nothing to do with the current administration; it's about putting into effect the right law.”
“It's time we adjusted this law to assure civil liberties are not being trampled.”
David Keene, Chairman of the American Conservative Union (“Civil liberties advocates laud Sununu for stand on Patriot Act reform,” Manchester Union Leader, 10/16/2003)
“These are people who are now taking a look at it and saying much of this is a good law, but let’s make sure we didn’t go too far. While the government should have all the power it needs to protect us, it shouldn’t have all the power it’d like to have.”
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) ("Hatch alarms right over anti-terror act," Salt Lake Tribune, 9/15/2003)
"To date it appears portions of the Patriot Act may have moved the scales out of balance"
Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, board member, National Rifle Association and American Conservative Union ("Hatch alarms right over anti-terror act," Salt Lake Tribune, 9/15/2003)
"I don’t know whether Hatch is slower to see this than other Republicans, but the Butch Otter vote was a statement to the administration that Congress is not going to stand there like potted plants and accept everything they send over. It’s been two years since 9-11, and for the administration to still answer the public's questions about how these powers are being used with ‘Just trust us’ is insulting."
Rep. Jim Leach, (R-IA) ("Latest Anti-Terrorism Proposals Not Likely to Move Through Congress Quickly," Congressional Quarterly, 9/11/2003)
"There are very few acts of Congress that deserve more careful oversight than the Patriot Act."
John W. Whitehead, President, Rutherford Institute (Memo on “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Terrorists: A Rutherford Institute Response to Attorney General John Ashcroft’s ‘Patriot Act Tour’ and Website,” 8/27/03 available at:
http://www.rutherford.org/PDF/JWWPatriotActResponse.pdf)
“Attorney General Ashcroft charges that passage of the Patriot Act radically changed ‘a culture of law enforcement inhibition’ in America. When the Act restricts or weakens constitutional and statutory protections for fundamental rights of privacy and personal autonomy, including a right characterized by the Supreme Court as being ‘as old as the Magna Carta,’ one can surely forgive a reasonable observer for wondering whether, in throwing off “inhibitions” on law enforcement for the sake of its pursuit of terrorists, America has carefully calibrated the ramifications of this authoritarian revolution for its continued commitment to the life and liberty of all its people.”
Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), member of the Senate Judiciary Committee ("Specter blasts part of anti-terrorism act," Associated Press, 8/2/2003)
[