On Valentine’s Day, Congressman Hanna voted against an effort to extend the worst provisions of the Patriot Act. The record shows that these provisions are used in connection to alleged terrorist conspiracies only a fraction of one percent of the time. More than 99 percent of the time, Patriot Act powers to conduct unreasonable search and seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment are done against people, many of them Americans, who are not even accused of having any connection to terrorism – even second or third-hand connections.

If you think about it, it makes perfect sense for a principled Republican to vote against the renewal of the Patriot Act. Republicans assert that they’re against big government, and the Patriot Act is the worst kind of big government program there is.

We also ought to be able to assume that Democrats in Congress would be willing to take such a stand in defense of our liberty. Yesterday, New York’s U.S. senators, Kirsten Gillibrand and Charles Schumer, showed that’s not the case. They both voted in favor of extending the worst spying powers of the Patriot Act – with no reforms whatsoever.

Will we hear any comment from Democrats in Trumansburg and the Town of Ulysses about this vote?

The existence of the Patriot Act has encouraged the federal government to ignore all restraints – even the very loose restraints that limit Patriot Act spying powers. A new report by the Electronic Frontier Foundation shows that there have been tens of thousands of violations of the Patriot Act by FBI agents, for example.

Our Democratic Senators ought to know better than to vote in favor of any provision that extends these unconstitutional powers. Please call Senator Schumer and Senator Gillibrand through the congressional switchboard at (202) 224-3121 to deliver that message.

While you’re at it, call Richard Hanna at his office in Auburn – 315-252-6700 – to thank him for his vote against Patriot Act extension.

Yesterday, the Ulysses Democratic Committee sent a letter to our U.S. Representative, Michael Arcuri. On June 20th, Congressman Arcuri introduced a resolution to limit debate on this far-reaching law to just one hour, with less than ten minutes given for the law’s opponents to speak. Then, Arcuri voted for the FISA Amendments Act.

The Ulysses Democratic Committee’s letter reads,

Dear Michael Arcuri,

We, the Ulysses Democratic Committee, in the Town of Ulysses, County of Tompkins, State of New York, are very disappointed, in your vote for the FISA Amendments Act. While we were petitioning to get you on the ballot, you were working to undermine our Constitution, and give retroactive immunity to telecoms that are illegally spying on us. We hope you continue to support the Constitution and the voters in your district.

The Ulysses Democratic Committee also sent letters to senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Barack Obama has declared that he will vote for the FISA Amendments Act, even if amendments are not passed to improve the law. The committee’s letter to Obama reads,

Senator Obama,

We Democrats in the Town of Ulysses, County of Tompkins, the only county you carried in New York State in the primary election, are deeply disappointed over your support for the FISA Amendments Act. Senator Obama you have said that if elected you would investigate the crimes of the present administration. Passing the FISA Amendments Act would remove some of these crimes from consideration and further damage our rights as citizens as defined by the 4th amendment to the Constitution. Bill Burton, a spokesman for Senator Obama, vowed that you would “support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.” It is essential that you declare his intention to honor this pledge now. We need 41 senators to maintain a filibuster of this seriously flawed legislation. Senator Obama, as the likely nominee of our party, you are the de-facto head of the party. We need your leadership in-order to find these 41 senators.

Senator Hillary Clinton has not been clear about her intentions with the FISA Amendments Act. The Ulysses Democratic Committee sent her the following letter:

Dear Senator Clinton:

Our community is very disappointed with the House for voting to pass the FISA Amendments Act. We call upon you to join our Senior Senator from NY, and Senators Dodd and Feingold, in acting to filibuster the bill in the Senate if telecom immunity is not stripped from the bill. We also question the need for increased powers for the Executive branch to spy on the American people without a warrant, which we understand to run contrary to our constitutionally-protected rights.

New York’s senior senator, Charles Schumer, has clearly expressed his opposition to the FISA Amendments Act. Thanks to him for making that stand.

The FISA Amendments Act is plainly in violation of the fourth amendment to the Constitution, part of the Bill of Rights. This legislation is an attack on our American freedom.

The FISA Amendments Act also provides retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that helped George W. Bush spy on millions of Americans’ personal communications. Why is that important? Retroactive immunity keeps lawsuits against the telecom corporations out of the courtroom, and thus prevents information about President Bush’s spying program from becoming public. Even Congress still does not know how far Bush went with his electronic spying.

Let me summarize: The FISA Amendments Act is a thoroughly bad idea. It opens the door to government abuse of power, and critically compromises our rights as American citizens.

What are our senators, Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton, likely to do? Will they vote against the FISA Amendments Act?

I can’t tell you. That’s because Senators Clinton and Schumer refuse to say what they’ll do.

I called their offices a few minutes ago. Senator Clinton’s aide only would say that Hillary Clinton opposes retroactive immunity. She wouldn’t say whether Senator Clinton would actually vote against the FISA Amendments Act or whether Senator Clinton opposes the other abusive elements of the law.

When I called Senator Schumer’s office, I was told that Senator Schumer will not comment about what he intends to do about the FISA Amendments Act.

Senators Russ Feingold and Christopher Dodd have announced their plan to filibuster the FISA Amendments Act. Will Schumer and Clinton join them or leave them hanging?

We’re residents of New York state, not Alabama or Wyoming. We deserve senators who will take the lead in representing our state’s progressive values, and not just sit on the fence.

Please call our senators as soon as possible, before the FISA Amendments Act comes up for a vote, and tell them how you’d like them to vote on this legislation, and the attempt to filibuster.

Senator Hillary Clinton: (202) 224-4451
Senator Charles Schumer: (202) 224-6542

If you call Arcuri’s office (202-225-3665), you will be told by the aide who answers the telephone that Congressman Arcuri does not support retroactive immunity for telecommunications corporations. You will be told that H.R. 6304 is a “compromise” bill that does not offer retroactive telecom immunity.

When you are told this by the aide who answers the telephone, ask the aide if he has actually read H.R. 6304. The aide I talked to admitted that he has not read the bill.

I have read the bill, and the assertion that it does not offer retroactive legal immunity for telecommunications corporations is laughable. But, I’m not a lawyer, so maybe you shouldn’t take my word for it. Consider what Senator Russ Feingold, who knows how to read a piece of legislation, has to say about the bill:

“The proposed FISA deal is not a compromise; it is a capitulation. The House and Senate should not be taking up this bill, which effectively guarantees immunity for telecom companies alleged to have participated in the President’s illegal program, and which fails to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans at home.”

Or, you could take the word of attorney Kevin Bankston, who works for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Bankston has read the legislation, and he concludes,

“Whatever gloss might be put on it, the so-called ‘compromise’ on immunity is anything but: the current proposal is the exact same blanket immunity that the Senate passed in February and that the House rejected in March, only with a few new bells and whistles so that political spinsters can claim that it actually provides meaningful court review.”

Political spinsters – that’s what we’re getting in the office of Congressman Michael Arcuri. They’re counting on you to not read the legislation for yourself. Maybe Representative Arcuri himself hasn’t even read the FISA Amendments Act. He admitted that he didn’t bother reading the Military Commissions Act before approving it.

You can choose to go along with the political spin offered by Arcuri’s staff, or you can be one of the few Americans who has read the FISA Amendments Act. I don’t expect many people to bother to read it. I don’t expect many people to care that much. I don’t expect many Democrats to question Arcuri, and make this a campaign issue. We’ll hear the same old claims that it’s somehow our duty to support Arcuri because he carries the name of Democrat, and for most Democrats, that will be a good enough argument.

We are not living in an age of idealism. Congressman Arcuri knows that, and that’s why he’s confident that he won’t lose much support on account of his vote for Bush’s spying bill today.

You get to decide whether you’re willing to go along with that, and confirm Arcuri’s sad judgment of the character of our citizens.