ASHINGTON — If the Homeland Security Act is not amended before passage,
here is what will happen to you:
Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you
buy and medical prescription you fill, every Web site you visit and e-mail you
send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank deposit you make,
every trip you book and every event you attend — all these transactions and
communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as "a virtual,
centralized grand database."
To this computerized dossier on your private life from commercial sources,
add every piece of information that government has about you — passport
application, driver's license and bridge toll records, judicial and divorce
records, complaints from nosy neighbors to the F.B.I., your lifetime paper trail
plus the latest hidden camera surveillance — and you have the supersnoop's
dream: a "Total Information Awareness"
about every U.S. citizen.
This is not some far-out Orwellian scenario. It is what will happen to your
personal freedom in the next few weeks if John Poindexter gets the unprecedented
power he seeks.
Remember Poindexter? Brilliant man, first in his class at the Naval Academy,
later earned a doctorate in physics, rose to national security adviser under
President Ronald Reagan. He had this brilliant idea of secretly selling missiles
to Iran to pay ransom for hostages, and with the illicit proceeds to illegally
support contras in Nicaragua.
A jury convicted Poindexter in 1990 on five felony counts of misleading
Congress and making false statements, but an appeals court overturned the
verdict because Congress had given him immunity for his testimony. He famously
asserted, "The buck stops here," arguing that the White House staff, and not the
president, was responsible for fateful decisions that might prove embarrassing.
This ring-knocking master of deceit is back again with a plan even more
scandalous than Iran-contra. He heads the "Information Awareness Office" in the
otherwise excellent Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which spawned the
Internet and stealth aircraft technology. Poindexter is now realizing his
20-year dream: getting the "data-mining" power to snoop on every public and
private act of every American.
Even the hastily passed U.S.A. Patriot Act, which widened the scope of the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and weakened 15 privacy laws, raised
requirements for the government to report secret eavesdropping to Congress and
the courts. But Poindexter's assault on individual privacy rides roughshod over
such oversight.
He is determined to break down the wall between commercial snooping and
secret government intrusion. The disgraced admiral dismisses such necessary
differentiation as bureaucratic "stovepiping." And he has been given a $200
million budget to create computer dossiers on 300 million Americans.
When George W. Bush was running for president, he stood foursquare in defense
of each person's medical, financial and communications privacy. But Poindexter,
whose contempt for the restraints of oversight drew the Reagan administration
into its most serious blunder, is still operating on the presumption that on
such a sweeping theft of privacy rights, the buck ends with him and not with the
president.
This time, however, he has been seizing power in the open. In the past week
John Markoff of The Times, followed by Robert O'Harrow of The Washington Post, have revealed the extent of Poindexter's
operation, but editorialists have not grasped its undermining of the Freedom of
Information Act.
Political awareness can overcome "Total Information Awareness," the combined
force of commercial and government snooping. In a similar overreach, Attorney
General Ashcroft tried his Terrorism Information and Prevention System (TIPS),
but public outrage at the use of gossips and postal workers as snoops caused the
House to shoot it down. The Senate should now do the same to this other
exploitation of fear.
The Latin motto over Poindexter"s new Pentagon office reads "Scientia Est
Potentia" — "knowledge is power." Exactly: the government's infinite knowledge
about you is its power over you. "We're just as concerned as the next person
with protecting privacy," this brilliant mind blandly assured The Post. A jury
found he spoke falsely before.
Sen Byrd Blasts Homeland
Bill - 'This Is A Hoax' Statement In The
Senate By Sen Robert Byrd R-WVa 11-19-2
"I remember years ago, when I was in the House of
Representatives, sending out a little booklet to the people in my
then-congressional district of how our laws are made ...[describes the process
of hearings, committees, debate, reports, etc. etc.]... we all remember how
those laws are made according to the script as prepared there in those handsome
little booklets that we send out. That is how the American people expect this
Congress to operate. That is the way we are supposed to operate.
But the way this bill was brought in here, less than 48 hours
ago, a brand-new bill. It had not been before any committee. It had undergone no
hearings, not this bill. It is a bill on our desks that has 484 pages. There are
484 pages in this bill.
It has not been before any committee. There have been no
hearings on this bill. There have been no witnesses who were asked to appear to
testify on behalf of the bill or in opposition to it. It did not undergo any
such scrutiny.
It was just placed on the Senate Calendar. It was offered as
an amendment here. And so here it is before the Senate now. There it is. That is
not the way in which our children are taught how we make our laws--not at
all.
The American people expect us to provide our best judgment and
our best insight into such monumental decisions. This is a far, far cry from
being our best. This is not our best. As a matter of fact, it is a mere shadow
of our best. Yet we are being asked, as the elected representatives of the
American people, those of us who are sent here by our respective States are
being asked on tomorrow to invoke closure on these 484 pages.
If I had to go before the bar of judgment tomorrow and were
asked by the eternal God what is in this bill, I could not answer God. If I were
asked by the people of West Virginia, Senator Byrd, what is in that bill, I
could not answer. I could not tell the people of West Virginia what is in this
bill.
There are a few things that I know are in it by virtue of the
fact that I have had 48 hours, sleeping time included, in which to study this
monstrosity, 484 pages. If there ever were a monstrosity, this is it. I hold it
in my hand, a monstrosity. I don't know what is in it. I know a few things that
are in it, and a few things that I know are in it that I don't think the
American people would approve of if they knew what was in there.
Even Senator Lieberman, who is chairman of the committee which
has jurisdiction over this subject matter, even he saw new provisions in this
legislation as he looked through it yesterday and today. As his staff looked
through it, they saw provisions they had not seen before, that they had not
discussed before, that had not been before their committee before.
Yet we are being asked on tomorrow to invoke cloture on that
which means we are not going to debate in the normal course of things. We are
going to have 30 hours of debate. That is it, 30 hours. That is all, 30 hours;
100 Senators, 30 hours of debate.
And this is one of the most far-reaching pieces of legislation
I have seen in my 50 years. I will have been in Congress 50 years come January
3... Never have I seen such a monstrous piece of legislation sent to this body.
And we are being asked to vote on that 484 pages tomorrow. Our poor staffs were
up most of the night studying it. They know some of the things that are in
there, but they don't know all of them. It is a sham and it is a shame.
We are all complicit in going along with it. I read in the
paper that nobody will have the courage to vote against it. Well, ROBERT BYRD is
going to vote against it because I don't know what I am voting for. That is one
thing. And No. 2, it has not had the scrutiny that we tell our young people,
that we tell these sweet pages here, boys and girls who come up here, we tell
them our laws should have.
Listen, my friends: I am an old meatcutter. I used to make
sausage. Let me tell you, I never made sausage like this thing was made. You
don't know what is in it. At least I knew what was in the sausage. I don't know
what is in this bill. I am not going to vote for it when I don't know what is in
it. I trust that people tomorrow will turn thumbs down on that motion to invoke
cloture. It is our duty.
We ought to demand that this piece of legislation stay around
here a while so we can study it, so our staffs can study it, so we know what is
in it, so we can have an opportunity to amend it where it needs amending.
Several Senators have indicated, Senator Lieberman among them,
that there are areas in here that ought to be amended. What the people of the
United States really care about is their security. That is what we are talking
about. We don't know when another tragic event is going to be visited upon this
country. It can be this evening, it can be tomorrow, or whatever. But this
legislation is not going to be worth a continental dime if it happens tonight,
tomorrow, a month from tomorrow; it is not going to be worth a dime. There are
people out there working now to secure this country and the people. They are the
same people who are already on the payroll. They are doing their duty right now
to secure this country.
This is a hoax. This is a hoax. To tell the American people
they are going to be safer when we pass this is to hoax. We ought to tell the
people the truth. They are not going to be any safer with that. That is not the
truth. I was one of the first in the Senate to say we need a new Department of
Homeland Security. I meant that. But I didn't mean this particular hoax that
this administration is trying to pander off to the American people, telling them
this is homeland security. That is not homeland security. Mr. President, the
Attorney General and Director of Homeland Security have told Americans
repeatedly there is an imminent risk of another terrorist attack. Just within
the past day, or few hours, the FBI has put hospitals in the Washington area,
Houston, San Francisco, and Chicago on notice of a possible terrorist
threat.
This bill does nothing--not a thing--to make our citizens more
secure today or tomorrow. This bill does not even go into effect for up to 12
months. It will be 12 months before this goes into effect. The bill just moves
around on an organizational chart. That is what it does--moves around on an
organizational chart.
The Senate Appropriations Committee, on which Senator Stevens
and I sit, along with 27 other Senators, including the distinguished Senator who
presides over the Chamber at this moment, the Senator from Rhode Island, Mr.
Reed, tried to provide funds to programs to hire more FBI agents, to hire more
border patrol agents, to equip and train our first responders, to improve
security at our nuclear powerplants, to improve bomb detection at our airports.
That committee of 29 Senators--15 Democrats and 14 Republicans--voted to provide
the funds for these homeland security needs. Those funds have been in bills that
have been out there for 4 months.
But the President said no--no, he would not sign it. President
Bush is the man I am talking about. He would not sign that as an emergency.
These moneys have been reported by a unanimous Appropriations Committee. But
this administration said no. So that is what happened. These are actions that
would make America more secure today. Did the President help us to approve these
funds? No. Instead, the President forced us--forced us--to reduce homeland
security funding by $8.9 billion, and he delayed another $5 billion. This is
shameful; this is cynical; this is being irresponsible. It is unfair to the
American people. And then to tell them Congress ought to pass that homeland
security bill--that is passing the buck.
Mr. President, I call attention to a column in the New York
Times. This is entitled ``You Are A Suspect.'' It is by William Safire. I will
read it:
"If the homeland security act is not amended before passage,
here is what will happen to you:" Listen, Senators. This is what William Safire
is saying in the New York Times of November 14, 2002. That is today. This is
what the New York Times is saying to you, to me, to us: "If the Homeland
Security Act is not amended before passage, here is what will happen to you:
Every purchase you make"-- Hear me now-- "Every purchase you make with a credit
card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill,
every Web site you visit and e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade
you receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event
you attend--all these transactions and communications will go into what the
Defense Department describes as ``a virtual, centralized grand database.'' ...
"Political awareness can overcome "Total Information Awareness," the combined
force of commercial and government snooping. In a similar overreach, Attorney
General Ashcroft tried his Terrorism Information and Prevention System (TIPS),
but public outrage at the use of gossips and postal workers as snoops caused the
House to shoot it down. The Senate should now do the same to this other
exploitation of fear." [ see complete Safire article at
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/14/opinion/14SAFI.html -- Byrd reads the entire
article to the Senate]
If the American people, if the American public is to believe
what they read in this week's newspapers, the Congress stands ready to pass
legislation to create a new Department of Homeland Security. Not with my vote.
Passage of such legislation would be the answer to the universal battle cry that
this administration adopted shortly after the September 11 attacks: Reorganize
the Federal Government.
How is it that the Bush administration's No. 1 priority has
evolved into a plan to create a giant, huge bureaucracy? How is it that the
Congress bought into the belief that to take a plethora of Federal agencies and
departments and shuffle them around would make us safer from future terrorist
attacks?..."
ASHINGTON — If the Homeland Security Act is not amended before passage,
here is what will happen to you:
