Cato Scholar Condemns Homeland Security Centralized Database Proposal

Cato Scholar Condemns Homeland Security Centralized Database Proposal
Information collection office would allow government to spy on everyday activities of Americans

WASHINGTON, D.C.--Unless Congress amends the Homeland Security Act before passage, its provisions on creating a centralized information database will affect the everyday activities of all Americans, says Cato Institute Senior Defense Analyst, Charles Peña. The legislation to create a new Department of Homeland Security includes widening the ability of the federal government to secretly monitor e-mails, bank accounts, credit card transactions and medical records, and place the data into a centralized database under the control of a new Pentagon office called the Information Awareness Office.

"The TIPS (Terrorist Information and Prevention Service) program proposed by the Justice Department that would have made us a nation of snitches was bad enough. This is much worse -- it will make us a nation of suspects. In its zeal to give the illusion of homeland security and trying to catch terrorists, the federal government will instead create a surveillance state to spy on its own citizenry. And in casting a wide net, such action will likely violate the guarantee of the Fourth Amendment for `people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.' Indeed, how many innocent Americans will be wrongfully accused? How many will be incarcerated, perhaps indefinitely, and possibly denied their constitutional rights if declared `enemy combatants'?"

Peña observed that "the first responsibility of the federal government is to protect its citizens, but not at their expense. In the name of homeland security and defending against terrorism, the ends do not justify the means."

Unless Congress amends the Homeland Security Act before passage, its provisions on creating a centralized information database will affect the everyday activities of all Americans, says Cato Institute Senior Defense Analyst, Charles Peña.

Once again, with feeling - the HSA contained NOTHING OF THE SORT.

The TIPS (Terrorist Information and Prevention Service) program proposed by the Justice Department that would have made us a nation of snitches was bad enough.

Section 880 of the HSA KILLED TIPS.

Cripes, don't any of these think-tank wankers ever read the damn bills they're commenting on? Peña's initial comment about the HSA database seems to have been lifted straight from Safire's column.

Pena knows that TIPS was killed.

He could have mentioned it here - but I guess good news isn't titilating enough.

Does it really matter if he borrowed from Safire?

No, what matters is that he borrowed from Safire without verifying Safire's claims.

Would you care to comment on the centralized database?

As the media has covered it, it's a bad idea on many levels. As the guys as DARPA are talking about it, not so bad but still needs a ton of scrutiny. However, I do agree with the premise that the feds need better data analysis tools.

Also, what is your take on section 802 of the Patriot Act, the section which expands the definition of domestic terrorism?

I am not familiar with that provision of the Patriot Act.

Here's Section 802, of the US Patriot Act. I see nothing wrong with the implications of the wording.

*************************************************

SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

(a) DOMESTIC TERRORISM DEFINED- Section 2331 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), by striking `by assassination or kidnapping' and inserting `by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping';

(2) in paragraph (3), by striking `and';

(3) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and'; and

(4) by adding at the end the following:

`(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--

`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;

`(B) appear to be intended--

`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

`(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

`(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

`(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'.

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 3077(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`(1) `act of terrorism' means an act of domestic or international terrorism as defined in section 2331;'.

*************************************************

According to the watch group, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF):

New definitions of terrorism expand scope of surveillance. One new definition of terrorism and three expansions of previous terms also expand the scope of surveillance. They are 1) § 802 definition of "domestic terrorism" (amending 18 USC §2331), which raises concerns about legitimate protest activity resulting in conviction on terrorism charges, especially if violence erupts; adds to 3 existing definition of terrorism (int'l terrorism per 18 USC §2331, terrorism transcending national borders per 18 USC §2332b, and federal terrorism per amended 18 USC §2332b(g)(5)(B)). These new definitions also expose more people to surveillance (and potential "harboring" and "material support" liability, §§ 803, 805).

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.