Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Stealth Legislation Undermines the Constitution
The Rutherford Institute ^ | January 12, 2004 | John W. Whitehead

Posted on 01/16/2004 4:55:05 PM PST by Federalist 78

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last
To: Byron_the_Aussie
If this kind of abuse had been proposed by Clinton and Reno, FR would be afire. There'd be petitions, freeps planned, you name it. But when Bush attacks Americans' rights it's like, 'please sir, may I have another?'

Bingo. Spot on again, Byron.

BUT...

Your comment about Bush being the best thing conservatives have going for them? And that one can at least hope that Bush'll come around? Fat chance. Lookit PATRIOT II. Lookit the Prescription Drug, "Improvement" and "Modernization" Act of 2003. The first tears up the Constitution; the second is little more than a whomping huge love letter to big pharma and the insurance industries, paid for by our tax dollars. Despicable, all of it.

21 posted on 01/16/2004 6:30:57 PM PST by WhaddaboutThisOne?
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Byron_the_Aussie

I shudder to think what a future Dem administration will do with a weapon like the PATRIOT Act.

R.J. Rummel made the following comment in a speech given to the ABA National Security Conference on "The Rule of Law in United States Foreign Policy and the New World Order. Washington, D.C., October 10-11, 1991:

Today, we can extend the idea of peace through democracy to cover freedom from government genocide and mass murder. But to do so requires overcoming incredible mass ignorance even about the megamurders for which authoritarian and totalitarian governments have been responsible.

Indeed, they are looney enough to try what many communists have. We have an Amendment that hasn't kept pace with the times. Nevertheless, should a situation similar to Tiananmen Square, 1989: The Declassified History occur here, there are enough citizens who own & are capable of bearing the tools necessary to produce a dissimilar outcome. Many members of the armed federal agencies & military would object to enforcing martial law. Others, who wouldn't give a rip about the Constitution, would have to face fellow federal agents and military personnel, along with several million armed citizens and probably most local police who would resist martial law.

Law review article, explaining the need to keep pace with the intent of that amendment:

The Revolutionary Second Amendment

22 posted on 01/16/2004 6:32:50 PM PST by Federalist 78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Federalist 78; dirtboy
"However, reportedly in order to avoid individual accountability, the Senate passed it with a voice vote. "

Oh Gawd. This crap is turning me into one of those awful one-note freepers who manages to find his pet peeve in every article.

End the voice votes.

Meantime, are you having any luck finding the bill, dirtboy?
23 posted on 01/16/2004 6:39:02 PM PST by m1911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: m1911
Ain't gonna bother until tomorrow. Beer and reading legislation don't mix. But at 38 pages, it should be an tad bit easier read than the Homeland Security Act.
24 posted on 01/16/2004 6:40:37 PM PST by dirtboy (Howard Dean - all bike and no path)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: m1911
Here's the link to the final bill:

H.R.2417 - Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)

25 posted on 01/16/2004 6:46:03 PM PST by dirtboy (Howard Dean - all bike and no path)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Byron_the_Aussie
This is where they get the authority to implement their new data base for air plane travel, the two Patriot Acts.

In two months, they will start to collect data, credit, medical and criminal, name and address, when you go buy an airplane ticket. By July they will have the data base up and running, and you will have your name ran thro the data base, to make sure you are who you say you are.
I will not be flying any where, if I cannot drive to get where I want to go, I will just stay home. What an invasion of your privacy
26 posted on 01/16/2004 6:48:15 PM PST by calawah98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
That was a monster. Frankly, I didn't get as far in Patriot I as I should have. Too many "append to" and "strike from" bits. A real time eater to figure out what it was changing, even with Findlaw.

Also, this sounds like an "and for other purposes" add on to some unrelated bill. That should cut it down.
27 posted on 01/16/2004 6:48:50 PM PST by m1911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
That was quick, Johnny Fever. Here's the offending section, not that it means much without finding the references:

SEC. 374. MODIFICATION TO DEFINITION OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTION IN RIGHT TO FINANCIAL PRIVACY ACT.

(a) MODIFICATION OF DEFINITION- Section 1114 of the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3414) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(d) For purposes of this section, and sections 1115 and 1117 insofar as they relate to the operation of this section, the term `financial institution' has the same meaning as in subsections (a)(2) and (c)(1) of section 5312 of title 31, United States Code, except that, for purposes of this section, such term shall include only such a financial institution any part of which is located inside any State or territory of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, or the United States Virgin Islands.'.

(b) CROSS REFERENCE MODIFICATION- Section 1101(1) of such Act (12 U.S.C. 3401(1)) is amended by inserting `, except as provided in section 1114,' before `means any office'.
28 posted on 01/16/2004 6:52:58 PM PST by m1911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: m1911

End the voice votes

Then they might be asked what it was they voted for?

those who supposedly represent us have developed an unnerving tendency to approve and vote for legislation that they do not study carefully.

29 posted on 01/16/2004 6:55:11 PM PST by Federalist 78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: m1911
For all the claims that this bill is Patriot II, from what I have read it only has a provision or two from that draft legislation that was floating about in early 2003...
30 posted on 01/16/2004 6:57:47 PM PST by dirtboy (Howard Dean - all bike and no path)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: WhaddaboutThisOne?; Howlin
..and that one can at least hope that Bush'll come around? Fat chance...

You may well be right, bud. Note I used the word, 'hope.'

I know it's a silly fantasy and ridiculously presumptuous but you know what I'd do if I was a good mate of the President's, now? Urge him to take a break, out in the mountains. Not three hours bass fishing or a morning's quail hunting and photo op, but a week or ten days, after elk or something. Out in the hills all day, no phones, going to sleep physically exhausted every night. Sitting around the camp fire with a very few trusted friends, no 'advisors', and staring into the embers. Just thinking about what the important things are, and what he wants his legacy to be. It is that kind of insistence on wilderness contemplation that made good presidents great. Theodore Roosevelt springs to mind. I still have hope for this president, not least because of his Christian commitments, but I reckon he needs to step off the treadmill for a moment and take stock of where's he's going on the big issues.

31 posted on 01/16/2004 7:01:39 PM PST by Byron_the_Aussie (http://www.theinterviewwithgod.com/popup2.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
Posts 19 and 20 HERE have the relevent text (section 374 of the bill) and the Conference Committee explanation of the law.
32 posted on 01/16/2004 7:03:07 PM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith; m1911
Thanks for the link. The more rational the discussion on this, the better. If anything is problematic, we can queue up the reforms along those for the Patriot Act.
33 posted on 01/16/2004 7:05:24 PM PST by dirtboy (Howard Dean - all bike and no path)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
I assume this is the provision referred to. I will check on the statute it modifies, but forgive me if I'm a little less worried than John Whitehead or Ron Paul. I mean, who exactly are these secret fascists in the GOP? There are people who care only about corporate profits, there are people who only care about getting elected, but I've yet to see evidence of ONE American citizen whose rights have been violated under the Patriot Act. (Jose Padilla's rights were violated, maybe, but not under the Patriot Act, plus I don't care).

SEC. 374. MODIFICATION TO DEFINITION OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTION IN RIGHT TO FINANCIAL PRIVACY ACT.

(a) MODIFICATION OF DEFINITION- Section 1114 of the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3414) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(d) For purposes of this section, and sections 1115 and 1117 insofar as they relate to the operation of this section, the term `financial institution' has the same meaning as in subsections (a)(2) and (c)(1) of section 5312 of title 31, United States Code, except that, for purposes of this section, such term shall include only such a financial institution any part of which is located inside any State or territory of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, or the United States Virgin Islands.'.

(b) CROSS REFERENCE MODIFICATION- Section 1101(1) of such Act (12 U.S.C. 3401(1)) is amended by inserting `, except as provided in section 1114,' before `means any office'.

34 posted on 01/16/2004 7:05:34 PM PST by Turin_Turambar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Turin_Turambar
Okay, now we need Sections 1114, 1115 and 1117 of the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3414), and Section 5312 of title 31, United States Code, and Section 1101(1) of such Act (12 U.S.C. 3401(1))
35 posted on 01/16/2004 7:08:43 PM PST by dirtboy (Howard Dean - all bike and no path)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
I just don't see why they want to access this info this way when they could pass a law to do it through FISA and still maintain judicial review. Maybe they think that wouldn't be quick enough, if so they could at least have the subpoena reviewed after the fact.

This is about the most honest editorial opposing the law I've seen, though the "stealth" argument is very weak since the president publically asked for this in a speech and it was debated and known about all along.

36 posted on 01/16/2004 7:16:01 PM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: calawah98
...in two months, they will start to collect data, credit, medical and criminal, name and address, when you go buy an airplane ticket...

Yep. Your assumption of innocence is gone, your right to be secure 'in your papers' is about to go, and everyone is smeared with collectivist suspicion as a potential terrorist. Bin Laden must be laughing his head off, in a cave somewhere, as he watches Americans wave goodbye to the rights which have secured their freedom and prosperity.

Years ago here we used to have these FR posters who would warn against all sorts of supposedly imagined fears. They'd talk about black helicopters, internment camps, human microchipping, that kind of thing. And a bunch of posters would torment them daily with references to tinfoil, or whatever. Well, the black helicopters came true. The internment camp at Gitmo came true, even though- at this point- it's mostly used for foreign suspected enemies. Microchipping came true, too. I'm going to make my own little tinfoil prediction- that not too long in the future US citizens will ask to wear a biometric chip. Because a lot of people will be like you, furious about the hassles involved in flying, but they'll have to fly, for reasons of work or distance. They'll talk themselves around- 'tagging saves me a lot of hassle', 'it's not so bad', and the old Stasi classic, 'I haven't done anything wrong, so I've got nothing to fear.'

37 posted on 01/16/2004 7:18:46 PM PST by Byron_the_Aussie (http://www.theinterviewwithgod.com/popup2.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: zeugma
Bush is even more dangerous than Clinton IMO.

It bears scrutiny.  Clinton, among other things, so out our national security to Communist China.
Bush seems to be selling out our freedom and security to the federal bureaucracy.

Ashcroft's determination to overrule state laws and deny people who wish the ability to end their lives without interference from the state leads us to a box canyon.  You can't win, you can't break even, and you can't get out of the game.
38 posted on 01/16/2004 7:38:41 PM PST by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
Okey-doke- this basically says they (oh, I mean THEM, of course) can already snoop around in bank accounts and so on if it's a *foreign* counterintel matter. As per usual, in my experience, it's scarier what the government could ALWAYS do, rather than anything in the PATRIOT ACT. So the kicker is in the redefinition of financial institution that increases the types of assets they can snoop into, but it doesn't really change the legal standard. Anyway, we would have to do something like this, since our chief enemies think that banks are wicked and evil according to Allah (OK, even a stopped clock is right twice a day).

Section 3414. Special procedures

(a)(1) Nothing in this chapter (except sections 3415, 3417, 3418, and 3421 (FOOTNOTE 1) of this title) shall apply to the production and disclosure of financial records pursuant to requests from - (FOOTNOTE 1) See References in Text note below.

(A) a Government authority authorized to conduct foreign counter- or foreign positive-intelligence activities for purposes of conducting such activities;

(B) the Secret Service for the purpose of conducting its protective functions (18 U.S.C. 3056; 3 U.S.C. 202, Public Law 90-331, as amended); or

(C) a Government authority authorized to conduct investigations of, or intelligence or counterintelligence analyses related to, international terrorism for the purpose of conducting such investigations or analyses.

(2) In the instances specified in paragraph (1), the Government authority shall submit to the financial institution the certificate required in section 3403(b) of this title signed by a supervisory official of a rank designated by the head of the Government authority.

(3) No financial institution, or officer, employee, or agent of such institution, shall disclose to any person that a Government authority described in paragraph (1) has sought or obtained access to a customer's financial records.

(4) The Government authority specified in paragraph (1) shall compile an annual tabulation of the occasions in which this section was used.

(5)(A) Financial institutions, and officers, employees, and agents thereof, shall comply with a request for a customer's or entity's financial records made pursuant to this subsection by the Federal Bureau of Investigation when the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (or the Director's designee in a position not lower than Deputy Assistant Director at Bureau headquarters or a Special Agent in Charge in a Bureau field office designated by the Director) certifies in writing to the financial institution that such records are sought for foreign counter intelligence (FOOTNOTE 2) purposes to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such an investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States. (FOOTNOTE 2) So in original. Probably should be ''counterintelligence''.

(B) The Federal Bureau of Investigation may disseminate information obtained pursuant to this paragraph only as provided in guidelines approved by the Attorney General for foreign intelligence collection and foreign counterintelligence investigations conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and, with respect to dissemination to an agency of the United States, only if such information is clearly relevant to the authorized responsibilities of such agency.

(C) On a semiannual basis the Attorney General shall fully inform the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate concerning all requests made pursuant to this paragraph.

(D) No financial institution, or officer, employee, or agent of such institution, shall disclose to any person that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained access to a customer's or entity's financial records under this paragraph.

(b)(1) Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit a Government authority from obtaining financial records from a financial institution if the Government authority determines that delay in obtaining access to such records would create imminent danger of -

(A) physical injury to any person;

(B) serious property damage; or

(C) flight to avoid prosecution.

(2) In the instances specified in paragraph (1), the Government shall submit to the financial institution the certificate required in section 3403(b) of this title signed by a supervisory official of a rank designated by the head of the Government authority.

(3) Within five days of obtaining access to financial records under this subsection, the Government authority shall file with the appropriate court a signed, sworn statement of a supervisory official of a rank designated by the head of the Government authority setting forth the grounds for the emergency access. The Government authority shall thereafter comply with the notice provisions of section 3409(c) of this title.

(4) The Government authority specified in paragraph (1) shall compile an annual tabulation of the occasions in which this section was used.

39 posted on 01/16/2004 7:38:58 PM PST by Turin_Turambar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

SEC 5312
(These are all typical money laundering methods, but I agree with the above post as to wondering why not go through FISA for a subpoena. I suppose it's simply that there really isn't the expectation of privacy with regard to these type of commercial transactions.)

(2) ''financial institution'' means -
(A) an insured bank (as defined in section 3(h) of the
Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813(h)));
(B) a commercial bank or trust company;
(C) a private banker;
(D) an agency or branch of a foreign bank in the United
States;
(E) an insured institution (as defined in section 401(a)
(FOOTNOTE 1) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1724(a)));
(FOOTNOTE 1) See References in Text note below.
(F) a thrift institution;
(G) a broker or dealer registered with the Securities and
Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.);
(H) a broker or dealer in securities or commodities;
(I) an investment banker or investment company;
(J) a currency exchange;
(K) an issuer, redeemer, or cashier of travelers' checks,
checks, money orders, or similar instruments;
(L) an operator of a credit card system;
(M) an insurance company;
(N) a dealer in precious metals, stones, or jewels;
(O) a pawnbroker;
(P) a loan or finance company;
(Q) a travel agency;
(R) a licensed sender of money;
(S) a telegraph company;
(T) a business engaged in vehicle sales, including
automobile, airplane, and boat sales;
(U) persons involved in real estate closings and settlements;
(V) the United States Postal Service;
(W) an agency of the United States Government or of a State
or local government carrying out a duty or power of a business
described in this paragraph;
(X) a casino, gambling casino, or gaming establishment with
an annual gaming revenue of more than $1,000,000 which -
(i) is licensed as a casino, gambling casino, or gaming
establishment under the laws of any State or any political
subdivision of any State; or
(ii) is an Indian gaming operation conducted under or
pursuant to the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act other than an
operation which is limited to class I gaming (as defined in
section 4(6) of such Act);
(Y) any business or agency which engages in any activity
which the Secretary of the Treasury determines, by regulation,
to be an activity which is similar to, related to, or a
substitute for any activity in which any business described in
this paragraph is authorized to engage; or
(Z) any other business designated by the Secretary whose cash
transactions have a high degree of usefulness in criminal, tax,
or regulatory matters.
40 posted on 01/16/2004 7:48:29 PM PST by Turin_Turambar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson