In opposition to the Protect America Act By Rep. Ron Paul, M.D.

Dandelion Salad

By Rep. Ron Paul, M.D.

30 January 2008

Statement of Ron Paul on H.R. 5104

A bill to extend the Protect America Act of 2007 for 30 Days

Madame Speaker, I rise in opposition to the extension of the Protect America Act of 2007 because the underlying legislation violates the US Constitution.

The mis-named Protect America Act allows the US government to monitor telephone calls and other electronic communications of American citizens without a warrant. This clearly violates the Fourth Amendment, which states:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The Protect America Act sidelines the FISA Court system and places authority over foreign surveillance in the director of national intelligence and the attorney general with little if any oversight. While proponents of this legislation have argued that the monitoring of American citizens would still require a court-issued warrant, the bill only requires that subjects be “reasonably believed to be outside the United States .” Further, it does not provide for the Fourth Amendment protection of American citizens if they happen to be on the other end of the electronic communication where the subject of surveillance is a non-citizen overseas.

We must remember that the original Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was passed in 1978 as a result of the U.S. Senate investigations into the federal government’s illegal spying on American citizens. Its purpose was to prevent the abuse of power from occurring in the future by establishing guidelines and prescribing oversight to the process. It was designed to protect citizens, not the government. The effect seems to have been opposite of what was intended. These recent attempts to “upgrade” FISA do not appear to be designed to enhance protection of our civil liberties, but to make it easier for the government to spy on us!

The only legitimate “upgrade” to the original FISA legislation would be to allow surveillance of conversations that begin and end outside the United States between non-US citizens where the telephone call is routed through the United States . Technology and the global communications market have led to more foreign to foreign calls being routed through the United States . This adjustment would solve the problems outlined by the administration without violating the rights of US citizens.

While I would not oppose technical changes in FISA that the intelligence community has indicated are necessary, Congress should not use this opportunity to chip away at even more of our constitutional protections and civil liberties. I urge my colleagues to oppose this and any legislation that violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


Keith Olbermann Special Comment: FISA (video)

6 thoughts on “In opposition to the Protect America Act By Rep. Ron Paul, M.D.

  1. Pingback: Ron Paul in Colorado 02.01.08 (videos) (updated) | Dandelion Salad

  2. Pingback: FISA Speeches in the Senate + Feingold calls it a Police State (videos) « Dandelion Salad

  3. Pingback: Ron Paul at the MTV-MySpace Closing Arguments 02.02.08 (video) « Dandelion Salad

  4. Dandi,
    I don’t care who it is that protects our civil rights, only that they protect our civil rights. The MS candidates are clearly chasing ghosts, and scaring the citizenery into submission. Using words(Patriot act, M.C. Act, Home Grown Terrorist Act…ecetera..,) that make it hard for a patriot stand against without looking like a sub-versive, or KooK.

    Someone please return “among them are; Life,Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness (or Property)…”, rights.

  5. Ron Paul is usually the disenting voice in congress. He has the most no votes of any congressperson. Ron Paul will help America more as president.

  6. I’m sure Ron Paul would make a great president, but the president only executes the acts of Congress. Isn’t it better to have someone in Congress keeping our representatives honest?

Comments are closed.