(PressMediaWire) April 07, 2008 Congressman Ron Paul's statement on the emerging surveillance bill -
Last month, the House
amended the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to expand the
government’s ability to monitor our private communications. This measure, if
it becomes law, will result in more warrantless government surveillance of
innocent American citizens.
Though some opponents
claimed that the only controversial part of this legislation was its grant of
immunity to telecommunications companies, there is much more to be wary of in
the bill. In the House version, Title II, Section 801, extends immunity from
prosecution of civil legal action to people and companies including any provider
of an electronic communication service, any provider of a remote computing
service, “any other communication service
provider who has access to wire or electronic communications,” any “parent,
subsidiary, affiliate, successor, or assignee” of such company, any
“officer, employee, or agent” of any such company, and any “landlord,
custodian, or other person who may be authorized or required to furnish
assistance.” The Senate version goes even further by granting retroactive
immunity to such entities that may have broken the law in the past.
The new FISA bill
allows the federal government to compel many more types of companies and
individuals to grant the government access to our communications without a
warrant. The provisions in the legislation designed to protect Americans from
warrantless surveillance are full of loopholes and ambiguities. There is no
blanket prohibition against listening in on all American citizens without a
warrant.
We have been told
that this power to listen in on communications is legal and only targets
terrorists. But if what these companies are being compelled to do is legal, why
is it necessary to grant them immunity? If what they did in the past was legal
and proper, why is it necessary to grant them retroactive immunity?
In communist
East Germany
, one in every 100 citizens was an informer for the dreaded secret police, the
Stasi. They either volunteered or were compelled by their government to spy on
their customers, their neighbors, their families, and their friends. When we
think of the evil of totalitarianism, such networks of state spies are usually
what comes to mind. Yet, with modern technology, what once took tens of
thousands of informants can now be achieved by a few companies being coerced by
the government to allow it to listen in to our communications. This surveillance
is un-American.
We should remember
that former
New York
governor Eliot Spitzer was brought down by a provision of the PATRIOT Act that
required enhanced bank monitoring of certain types of financial transactions.
Yet we were told that the PATRIOT Act was needed to catch terrorists, not
philanderers. The extraordinary power the government has granted itself to look
into our private lives can be used for many purposes unrelated to fighting
terrorism. We can even see how expanded federal government surveillance power
might be used to do away with political rivals.
The Fourth Amendment
to our Constitution requires the government to have a warrant when it wishes to
look into the private affairs of individuals. If we are to remain a free society
we must defend our rights against any governmental attempt to undermine or
bypass the Constitution.
SOURCE: House.gov/Paul