[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 24 (Tuesday, February 15, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H800-H801]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      ON EXTENDING THE PATRIOT ACT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McClintock) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Speaker, last year I voted to extend the 
Patriot Act for 1 year. I regret that vote and was glad to have been 
able to correct it, although I'm pained that the House voted otherwise 
yesterday.
  During this past year, I have become convinced that the provisions of 
the so-called Patriot Act are an affront to the Bill of Rights and a 
serious threat to our fundamental liberty as Americans.
  The Fourth Amendment arises from the abuses of the British Crown that 
allowed roving searches by revenue agents under the guise of what were 
called ``writs of assistance'' or ``general warrants.'' Instead of 
following specific allegations against specific individuals, the 
Crown's revenue agents were given free rein to search indiscriminately.
  In 1761, the famous colonial leader James Otis challenged these 
writs, arguing that ``a man's house is his castle;

[[Page H801]]

and whilst he is quiet, he is as well guarded as a prince in his 
castle. This writ, if it should be declared legal, would totally 
annihilate this privilege.'' Now 250 years later, the Patriot Act 
restores these roving searches.
  In the audience that day in 1761 was a 25-year-old lawyer named John 
Adams. He would later recall: ``Every man of an immense crowded 
audience appeared to me to go away as I did, ready to take arms against 
writs of assistance. Then and there was the first scene of the first 
act of opposition to the arbitrary claims of Great Britain. Then and 
there, the child, `Independence' was born.''
  The American Founders responded with the Fourth Amendment. It 
provides that before the government can invade a person's privacy the 
executive branch must present sworn testimony to an independent 
judiciary that a crime has occurred and that there is reason to believe 
that an individual should be searched for evidence of the crime, and 
then specify the place to be searched and the things to be seized. The 
John Doe roving wiretaps provided under this bill are a clear breach of 
this crystal-clear provision.
  The entire point of having an open and independent judiciary is so 
that abuses of power can be quickly identified by the public and 
corrected. The very structure of this law prevents that from occurring.
  I also object to the lone wolf provision of the act that allows a 
person who's not acting in concert with a foreign power to be treated 
as if they were. This malignant fiction utterly blurs the critical 
distinction between a private person protected under our Constitution 
and an enemy combatant acting as an agent of a foreign power.
  My chief of staff, Igor Birman, was born in Moscow. His family 
emigrated to America when he was 14. He tells of the days leading up to 
their long-awaited departure. His father had technical expertise, and 
the authorities were desperate to find some pretense to cancel the 
family's exit visa.
  A week before they departed for America, the family returned home to 
find that the Soviet authorities had turned their apartment upside down 
looking for anything that could be used to block their emigration. This 
was not the result of suspected criminal activity but, rather, the same 
kind of open-ended search the Fourth Amendment protects us against.
  His younger brother was terrified and hysterical. His mother calmed 
the little boy by saying, Don't worry, don't worry. We're leaving in a 
few days for America. This will never happen to us there.
  Our country is threatened by foreign governments and multinational 
terrorist groups which are actively trying to do us harm, backed by a 
fifth column within our own borders. But we have faced far more 
powerful governments and far better organized networks of spies and 
saboteurs in the past without having to shred our Bill of Rights.
  The freedom that our Constitution protects is the source of our 
economic prosperity, our moral authority, and our martial strength. It 
is also the ultimate bulwark against authoritarianism. Abraham Lincoln 
was right: No transatlantic military giant, let alone some fanatical 
terrorist group, can ever ``step across the ocean and crush us at a 
blow.'' And no foreign power can destroy our Constitution. Only we can 
do that.
  As Lincoln said: ``As a Nation of free men, we are destined to live 
forever, or die by suicide.''

                          ____________________