[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 150 (Thursday, October 4, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H11303-H11304]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     PROTECTING THE BILL OF RIGHTS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, there are certain principles 
that do not divide us by whether we've Republican or Democrat or an 
independent and that is, of course, the precious Bill of Rights, and 
the idea that we live in a country that is so unique and so different 
and so many people aspire to find just a simple taste of the democracy 
that we enjoy.
  And yet, after 9/11, all of us gathered together realizing that if we 
allowed the terrorists to terrorize us, change our way of life, they 
had won.
  Unfortunately, we have seen a number of legislative initiatives and 
as a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I take no back step to 
securing America. But I understand that our values of democracy and the 
protection of the Bill of Rights should be the anchor of this society. 
And if we terrorize ourselves by taking away our rights, the terrorists 
have won.
  And so I stand here to emphasize certain basic principles as we look 
to revise the FISA law, and that is, of course, the law that clearly 
intercepts, undermines the fourth amendment; the right to be in your 
home and to be protected against unreasonable search and seizure.
  I'm delighted that you will be hearing, over the next couple of days, 
along with a markup coming up, the principles enunciated that emphasize 
the protection of the values of America. And so we simply believe, as I 
believe, in joining with a number of colleagues to emphasize that we 
believe that we live in a dangerous world, but we also should be guided 
by principles. Those principles should ensure that Americans do not 
have to be surveilled in their homes when they are communicating with 
fellow Americans. We should not be suspect of our telecommunications 
companies to think that they are in cahoots, collaborating with our 
government to spy on us.
  We realize that there is a difference when we talk about foreign-to-
foreign communications, that there is a need for surveillance. And I'm 
here today to emphasize that we should stand and fight for the 
protection of the fourth amendment, to protect you in your homes and, 
at the same time, you can be protected against terrorists, because 
terrorism depends upon making sure that you have the information.
  And when you have a court that is made available under the existing 
FISA law that was established in 1978 that understands the necessity 
and the urgency of the law enforcement officers that come to them, then 
you should support the idea of court intervention whenever someone 
determines

[[Page H11304]]

from the Federal Government to intervene and to listen to your 
communications between one American and another.
  So I stand here today to emphasize that the court system, the FISA 
system, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, is an imperative 
to protect you as Americans when your government wants to spy on you.
  Will we be safe from terrorists? Absolutely. Because part of the 
terrorism is to ensure that information is shared with law enforcement 
so that we can be in front of this issue.
  I am looking forward to the markup. I'm looking forward to an 
opportunity to devise legislation that preserves the preciousness of 
the Bill of Rights and the fourth amendment. We cannot step back and be 
subjected to our own terror, and that is to be frightened so much that 
we take the Bill of Rights and extinguish it.
  I may not agree with the interpretation of the second amendment, but 
it does exist and it is part of the Bill of Rights. You may have a 
different interpretation of the first amendment, but it is part of the 
Bill of Rights. You may have a suspect interpretation of the fourth 
amendment, but the language is clear: you are to be protected against 
unreasonable search and seizure. It is unreasonable to not go into a 
court established to do that, to protect you, to have a court 
objectively look at what the urgency is and to provide that 
intervention to protect your rights.
  I look forward to working with a number of colleagues on language 
that I have joined and written to establish the parameters of 
protecting us from the violation of the fourth amendment.
  Keep the FISA law as it is. Modernize it. Ensure that the FISA court 
that intervenes protects our rights and keeps our values, the values 
that so many have strived so hard to seek a place in the sun in this 
Nation because they truly believe that the democracy and the liberties 
that we have are worth protecting, worth protecting with their lives. 
And I believe here in the United States Congress, we must stand in that 
tradition.

                          ____________________