The Least Patriotic Act

It is a rare day when I can say the words: “I agreed with Rand Paul.”  The gentleman from Kentucky filibustered for 10 hours on the Senate floor Wednesday against the overreach given to the NSA (and many other governmental agencies) by the Bush-era Patriot Act.  While it was probably a political ploy designed to raise his stature in the polls and differentiate himself from rival Republican presidential hopefuls, for once he was making sense.

When this group of laws was enacted in October of 2001, I was absolutely outraged.  This knee-jerk legislation was one of the purest examples of the Hegelian Principle I had ever seen.  Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel was a 19^th century philosopher who presented an evil three-step plan that allowed regal or elected leaders to gain more control over their constituents by creating hysteria.  Step 1: Create a problem or conflict and build it up out of proportion.  Step 2: Build opposition to the problem by using the media on a daily basis until people are clamoring for a remedy.  Step 3: Offer the public a solution in the form of a new law that they never would have supported before.

The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 was such a law.  Most people are not fully aware of what the USA PATRIOT acronym means.  The name stands for “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism".  The law is comprised of 10 Titles which changed several previous laws including the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986, the Bank Secrecy Act, and the Immigration and Nationality Act.  The portion of the law which typically is the target of most public derision is Title II which allows various agencies to use “Enhanced Surveillance Procedures” to snoop into the wire, oral and electronic communications of virtually anyone in the name of “public safety.”

Our government used a terrible day in our history to play on the emotions of our nation.  Terror came to our shores and America did what it has always done when a Bush was controlling the White House: We started a war.  Yes, we would start a war on terror and implement all sorts of cloak and dagger programs to find those bad people who were living among us while plotting our collective demise.  But after implementing an invasive law, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that cost billions of dollars, thousands of American lives, and tens of thousands of civilian casualties are we any closer to realizing victory against terrorism?

Clearly, I am not privy to confidential governmental operations.  Some of this sneaking and peeking may actually have helped the FBI identify money laundering operations, fraud, or criminal plots.  But, for the average person, how often can we point to the Patriot Act and say that it resulted in preventing lone wolf attackers like the Boston Marathon bombers from doing their worst?  So often we hear about people like Ryan Giroux, a man who killed one and injured five others on March 18 in Mesa, Arizona when he went on a shooting spree.  He reportedly was well known to police and had a criminal history that included murder.  If that sort of behavior isn’t terrifying I don’t know what is; and, yet, how did the Patriot Act prevent it?

Our civil rights have been deeply infringed, but the average citizen remains blissfully unaware of the level to which we have been laid bare.  There is no privacy.  Our personal information isn’t safe from common thieves or from common bureaucrats.  Congress has the opportunity to rein in these surveillance programs, but likely will do very little of any significance. .“Are you really willing to give up your liberty for security?” Senator Paul asked his colleagues.  Unfortunately, maintaining the status quo will likely be the undebated Congressional answer to that question.