Bush’s new anti-Kerry ad starts airing today in 19 states. It says Kerry, "pressured by fellow liberals," changed his position on the Patriot Act. Kerry voted for the legislation, which passed 45 days after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Seems to me that the first vote on the Patriot Ac was rushed through so fast that many Congress members might not even have been able to read it in time. As with many things in our government, it’s a complex situation. In the wake of 911, it got more support than it should have – who was going to vote no? More than 250 cities and counties have passed laws repealing the act. Some even make it a crime to cooperate with it.

Ground Zero? On February 4, the New York City Council overwhelmingly approved a resolution denouncing provisions of the federal USA Patriot Act for infringing on civil liberties.

Who says there are fundamental problems with the Patriot Act? John Kerry -and of course Howard Dean- but also Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey, and Bob Barr. In January part of the Patriot Act I was ruled unconstitional – in violation of the First and Fifth Amendments. But while we gaped at Hussein’s capture, Bush signed into law a bill that gives the FBI increased surveillance powers and dramatically expands the reach of the USA Patriot Act. The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 grants the FBI unprecedented power to obtain records from financial institutions without requiring permission from a judge. Under the law, the FBI does not need to seek a court order to access such records, nor does it need to prove just cause. The law broadens the definition of "financial institution" to include such businesses as insurance companies, travel agencies, real estate agents, stockbrokers, the U.S. Postal Service and even jewelry stores, casinos and car dealerships. The law also prohibits subpoenaed businesses from revealing to anyone, including customers who may be under investigation, that the government has requested records of their transactions.

See the power grab legislation

The new law lets the FBI acquire records simply by having a field agent draft a so-called "national security letter" stating the information is relevant to a national security investigation.

Bush effectively expanded the powers of the USA Patriot Act by attaching the redefinition of ‘financial institution’ to the Intelligence Authorization Act. This is how the Bush Administration and its Congressional allies avoided public hearings and floor debates for the expansion of the Patriot Act. The FBI had, through this back door, obtained the power to probe the financial records of American citizens, even if the feds don’t suspect their involvement in crime or terrorism.

The Patriot Acts have made legal most of what was illegal for the Justice Department back in 1968. Many forms of protest are now potentially considered terrorist acts by the government. US citizens are "disappeared" under the guise of national security and could risk losing their citizenship and being deported. Law enforcement can break into someone’s house, take whatever evidence they feel is appropriate and not let the victim of the break-in know until after the fact. Secret courts can convict defendants who may or may not have been involved in antigovernment actions. Antigovernment actions are being re-defined as any actions that block commerce. People who donate money to a charity organization that the Justice department eventually ties to an organization the US government has deemed terrorist can be charged with aiding and abetting.

Here in Atlanta, Creative Loafing published the account of Atlanta bookstore employee Marc Schultz, who found himself visited by FBI agents after someone spotted him reading an article titled "Weapons of Mass Stupidity" at a cafe. Schultz says the agents told him: ‘There’s no problem. We’d just like to get to the bottom of this. Now, if we can’t, then you may have a problem. And you don’t want that.’

The Patriot Act is not the only issue up for debate, but it’s the one that Bush can swing most easily among people who are frightened. What we need instead, as with so many issues, is a real debate in this country. The public needs to engage the issue about the proper balance between liberty and security, given our history of human rights and values, who we are as a national identity, and the very real threats that we face. The power of the goverment should have checks and balances. My view is that while we need to give the government enough authority to ensure for the common defense, we also need to limit the government’s own powers where it might be corrupted into abuses directed toward the citizenry. No, blind trust in benevolence won’t cut it.

And how can governance so fundamentally opposed to everything this country thinks it should stand for be referred to as the "Patriot" act? Just another sleight of hand.

Jennifer Van Bergen at Truthout.com wrote a series of articles about the effects of the Patriot act back in April of 2002, in which she raises the issue of torture. As we’ve seen, it’s a valid concern. So hey, let’s give it all up for Bush, Ashcroft, Rove, and all the neo-cons!

So we give up due process, we undermine the Constitution, we violate the rights of immigrants and citizens alike, lose judicial oversight on powers of the FBI and CIA, grant permission for domestic spying, equate civil liberties with aid to terrorists, turn back time to the 1798 Alien Act, hold "detainees" without being charging them with any violation even if they make bail, torture at the hands of US-directed mercenaries not subject to the Geneva convensions or at the hands of our own forces, violate the CIA’s charter not to engage in domestic law enforcement or internal security functions, override the provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), abandon the idea of probable cause, define anyone as a terrorist we want to, give up rights of counsel, accept our loss of privacy for financial, educational and medical records…

At that point, haven’t the terrorists pretty much won? If someone can be detained and even tortured on the basis of evidence he or she has no opportunity to examine or try to refute in this country, then as far as I’m concerned, it just ain’t America anymore.

"Do not let us be told that we are to excite a fervor against a foreign aggression to establish a tyranny at home; that like the arch traitor we cry "Hail Columbia" at the moment we are betraying her to destruction; that we sing "Happy Land," when we are plunging it in ruin and disgrace; and that we are absurd enough to call ourselves free and enlightened while we advocate principles that would have disgraced the age of Gothic barbarity."
– Senator Edward Livingston on June 21, 1798, the last day of the congressional debates on the Alien and Sedition Acts.