The
Police State Enhancement Act of 2003
Bush Administration Begins Work on Secretive
Sequel to the USA PATRIOT Act
Last Friday
night, PBS's "Bill Moyers: Now" program aired a report on a leak, to
a D.C. nonpartisan, public service journalism nonprofit called the Center for
Public Integrity (CPI), of a closely held Justice Department secret: the draft
language of proposed legislation that would update and sharply expand 2001's
USA PATRIOT Act.
It is one
of the most horrifying documents ever to come out of a city and a government
numbed to horrifying documents. Every American should read it, and get angry.
While it's still not a crime to do so.
The full,
120-page "not for circulation" text of the proposed Domestic Security
Enhancement Act of 2003 (DSEA), dated January 9, 2003, is available online at
the CPI website, or at Moyers' website.
According
to both CPI and the Moyers report, while existence of the draft was widely
rumored in the capitol for months, even the heads of relevant Congressional
committees had not seen details before CPI's publication of the whole draft.
Only Vice President Cheney and Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert are known
(through Moyers' scrutiny of the control sheets at the Office of Legislative
Affairs) to have been sent advance copies of the draft. Staff members of the
Senate Judiciary Committee had been told by the Justice Department, as recently
as last week, that no such bill was in the works.
It's easy
to understand why the Justice Department would want this legislation to have as
little time for exposure to Congressional and public scrutiny as possible
before it is rammed into law. Exposed to sunlight, this thing starts stinking
in a hurry. Like the USA PATRIOT and the Homeland Security bills before it, the
Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 is packed, in virtually every
paragraph, with repugnant and terrifying details that would have the Founding
Fathers spinning in their graves. Among the lowlights:
The
ability by the federal government to declare individuals, whether or not
they are citizens, to be official enemies with whom the United States is at
war. Among other things, this extension of the logic of the War
On Terror -- which made the absurdist leap of declaring the U.S. to be at war
against terrorist groups rather than nation states or their militaries --
enables the U.S., using the logic already established in the precedent of
declaring Jose Padilla and Yasser Esam Hamdi to be "enemy
combatants," to hold any citizen indefinitely, without criminal
charges, judicial review, or access to an attorney or any other outside party.
All the government must do is declare that individual to be someone with whom
the United States is (knowingly or not) at war. As a side note, a whole section
of new law also allows the government to strip American citizens of their
citizenship, on the basis of engaging in any activity, even if it is lawful,
if it is in support of a group the U.S. deems to be terrorist. This, again,
also allows use on the new ex-citizen the same sort of kangaroo court proceedings
now inflicted on non-citizens.
Expanding
the definition of espionage or "enemy" activity to include otherwise
lawful activity, as well as activity that knowingly or not
assists a foreign "power." And that power, of course, can now be a
"terrorist cell" or even an individual. From section 102: "Showing
that the intelligence gathering violates the laws of the United States is both
unnecessary and counterproductive." Especially since searching the
Internet at your local library is not, as of yet, otherwise illegal.
Prohibition
of the publicizing of information on who the government "detains." Not only
will citizens and non-citizens alike be subjected to these perversions of
justice, but any publicity given to them or their cases will now be illegal.
FOIA requests will be denied, leaks will be crimes, and publication of that
leaked information will also be criminal. This is essentially the legalization
of secret arrests, no different in form or impact than Stalin's goons taking
people away in the dead of night.
Creation
of a DNA database of suspected "terrorists." Because
all persons detained by a federal agency would be included regardless of
whether they have been convicted of any crime; because the barriers between
individuals and terrorist groups and between foreign and domestic terrorists
have been erased; and because there will be no outside check on this secret
information; anyone and everyone could be included in this
"terrorist" database.
Superseding
all state-level bans on types of law enforcement surveillance activity. This
would, with one stroke, take out dozens of laws around the country which
courageous local citizens fought for decades to implement in order to curb law
enforcement abuses. Courts would also be limited in their ability to issue
injunctions against such activities.
The
creation of several new crimes eligible for the federal death penalty. DSEA also
vastly expands penalties for "terrorism"- and
"espionage"-related offenses, and also dramatically toughens
criminal penalties for even routine immigration violations.
There's
more; much more. Read it yourself, and share copies with friends and with
public officials and your local media outlets.
Any
proposed legislation of this type is likely to undergo changes -- often
worsening ones -- as it chugs through Congress. But what this draft makes clear
is that the wide variety of Bush Administration assaults on civil liberties
over the past 16 months have been part of a carefully crafted strategy, with
each outrage -- once judicial challenges and public indignation dies away --
laying the groundwork, through precedent, for the next, more extreme measure.
The
overall thrust of that strategy is to: broaden the definition of terrorist
activity and crime; broaden the ability of law enforcement to investigate such
activity, whether the activity is lawful or not; suspend due process and impose
extreme penalties for persons suspected of such activity, short-circuit the
entire U.S. Constitution and legal system by eliminating due process; increase
the penalties for persons, with or without conviction or trial, that are
imprisoned for such activity; and bar publication of information relating to
these practices.
At no
point in this sequence is the Bush/Ashcroft notion of legal process distinguishable
from Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Saddam, or any other despot one cares to name. The
only difference is the frequency of usage, and that's the next step:
particularly given the bellicosity of Bush foreign policy, soon to be on
display in Iraq and Palestine, future major terrorist crimes on American soil
are a virtual certainty. Israel, a much smaller, much more militarized, and far
more experienced country, cannot prevent them; there is no reason to expect the
U.S. can, either.
When that
happens, the public and political outrage will be the impetus that allows these
sweeping measures to be implemented more broadly. The laws will already be on
the books and found meritous, more often than not, by 20 years of conservative
court appointees.
In some dictatorships,
people are simply taken out back and shot. Under the Police State Enhancement
Act of 2003, people can be taken, and shot, but may have to wait a while before
their bullet arrives because of all the paperwork involved. That will probably
be the next bill: "The Terrorist Execution Paperwork Reduction Act of
2004."
All in
all, the only individuals whose behavior is earning them the title of people
officially at war with the United States -- and all it has stood for - - work
in the Bush Administration itself. The Congressional Republicans, and
Democrats, who might well support such legislation deserved to be deluged by
public outcry. Tell them it's an affront to liberty and democracy. Tell them
it's unpatriotic. Tell them the Domestic Surveillance Enhancement Act of 2003
is positively Un-American.
Call and
tell them that if they pass this legislation, and then say something critical
or vote the "wrong" way on some future day, it could just as easily
be them who are taken out back and shot.
And hope
your phone's not tapped.
Geov Parrish is a
Seattle-based columnist and reporter for the Seattle Weekly, In These Times and
Eat the State! Posted with author’s permission.