Unconstitutional “Patriot” Act Extended

As most of you may know, the so-called “Patriot” Act was recently extended. It was originally thought that the act would pass without opposition, but the Patriot Act failed the House vote originally by eight votes. It was later passed once it was put up for a second vote where only a majority was needed instead of two thirds. On Tuesday, the Senate passed a three month extension of the “Patriot” Act by a 86 to 12 vote. Some Senate members are attempting to pass the act permanently.

Much of the opposition in the Senate was led by Senator Rand Paul. “Now we have essentially government agents, akin to soldiers, writing warrants; it’s ripe for abuse,” said Senator Paul. The senator has also posted a press release explaining why he opposes the Act and encouraging his fellow congressmen to do the same.

In his letter, Rand Paul cites American revolutionist James Otis, who argued against general warrants and writs of assistance. During his time, they were often used without judicial approval by British soldiers and included no restrictions or description of what or where was to be searched or seized. He described these warrants as “the worst instrument[s] of arbitrary power, the most destructive of English liberty and the fundamental principles of law, that ever w[ere] found in an English law book.” His objected was based on his belief that these warrants “placed the liberty of every man in the hands of every petty officer.” Rand Paul analogously described his resistance to the “Patriot” Act as similar to Otis’s opposition to the writs of assistance.

Rand Paul addressed the Senate, arguing against the “Patriot” Act. He later discussed the “Patriot” Act’s renewal with Judge Andrew Napolitano on Freedom Watch:

Ron Paul also led the opposition in the House; unfortunately, his words fell on deaf ears. You can hear his address to the House of “Representatives” here.

According to Rand Paul in the video above, the “Patriot” Act has been used 200,000 times in the last ten years. Furthermore, so-called “suspicious bank accounts” were reported 2,000,000 times, from banks to the FBI. These bank records also merit some attention; most of these 2,000,000 bank records were from American citizens! This is an enormous infringement on privacy.

The Provisions that were set to expire and were voted upon are perhaps the worst parts of the “Patriot” Act, and addressed roving wiretapping, governmental seizures, and the “lone wolf provision.” The roving wiretapping allows law enforcement officials to use surveillance without identifying the individual who is going to be wiretapped or at what location. One section allows governmental seizures of “any tangible thing.” The “lone wolf” provision allows electronic monitoring of a person without proof that the suspect is an foreign agent or terrorist.

It should be clear that the so-called “Patriot” Act is an enormous infringement to our 4th amendment right to privacy, ignores the fact that only judges can issue warrants. However, for those of you who may be skeptical, here is the text of the Fourth Amendment:

“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.”

Think about it. Under the “Patriot” Act, law enforcement can participate in searches and seizures without a Judge’s approval. Now all it takes is an FBI letter, and their decision can be based on arbitrary terms; they can essentially search, seizure, or surveille anything they want. Anyone – law-abiding American citizens included – can be victims of the “Patriot” Act. 200,000 American’s already have. You no longer have a right to privacy, America.

The “Patriot Act” is anything but patriotic. We’re not drifting towards a police state, we are already there.

Please Support Ron Paul’s Audit the Fed Initiative – HR459 and S202

Over the past several months, Dr. Ron Paul has made it his personal mission to take on the Federal Reserve. Clearly, it is an issue that is important to him, as is evident by his scores of TV interviews on the matter, his bestselling book End The Fed, and his surprisingly popular bill HR-1207, which supports an “audit” of the Federal Reserve.

Recently, Congressman Paul was also appointed chairman of a subcommittee to oversee the federal reserve. While this position seems to have been overstated in it’s importance, it is a valuable platform for someone so passionate about monetary reform and has strengthened his voice supporting a full and public audit of the Federal Reserve bank.

Dr. Paul and his recently-elected son, Rand Paul, have reintroduced legislation into both houses of Congress – HR459 and S202 (originally HR1207 and S604). The support for this bill has been continuously building. The bill has hundreds of cosponsors. With our current economic situation and with the Federal Reserve printing money at will, we’ve never had a better time to pass such legislation. This initiative has a real chance of passing. Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve can print money at will, despite growing debt, without any oversight of Congress. Bailouts of private business and printing money despite growing debt is a clear recipe for financial disaster in our country. If you think the recent recession was bad, I fear, unless something is done, our economy will take a plunge much more severe. For more information on the Audit the Fed bill(s), check out AuditTheFed.com, which provides information on the bill, a petition, and tools to contact your local representatives about this bill.

The Campaign or Liberty has created a separate petition where you can encourage your Congressman to support a full audit of the Federal Reserve.

From the Campaign For Liberty’s petition:

“Audit the Fed”
Petition to Congress

Whereas: Congress has the authority to perform a public audit of the Federal Reserve, and the American people deserve to know how their tax dollars are being spent; and
Whereas: The Federal Reserve refuses to publicize its meetings and its inner-workings or even to account for $2 TRILLION in recent taxpayer-backed loans; and
Whereas: Allowing such secrecy to continue clearly allows for the potential for abuse; and
Whereas: The Federal Reserve System leads to constant economic crises like the current housing crisis and the resulting chaos; and
Whereas: The Federal Reserve System forces fuel, food, housing, medical care and education costs upward, meaning that everyone who is NOT on the government dole is forced to make do with less as the value of their money slowly decreases; and
Whereas: History shows us that riots, violence and full-scale police states can result when people finally realize fiat money isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on and REFUSE to accept it;
Therefore: In the interest of a healthy economy and more transparent government, I urge you to cosponsor the Audit the Fed Bill and seek a vote in the House.

Again, you can sign this petition here. If you support transparency in government and think we have a right to know how our money is being spent you should support this bill.

There is no reason I can think of not to support Ron Paul’s audit of the federal reserve. Even if you disagree with Dr. Paul’s view on ending the Federal Reserve, supporting and audit of the Federal Reserve and encouraging transparency can do no harm. Please take a moment to voice your support for these bills with your Congressmen.

On topic, Ron Paul recently addressed the House of Representatives, where he discusses the problems with the Federal Reserve, including it’s lack of transparency, how it creates economic problems such as inflation and unemployment, and how the Federal Reserve “facilitates deficit financing. Watch CSPAN’s video here:

At approximately 4:15 – “It’s the Federal Reserve. They are the ones who literally facilitate deficit financing. So for them to turn around and say it’s all the blame of the Congress, the are absolutely being disingenuous. It’s the Federal Reserve and the monetary system that encourages runaway deficits, runway spending, runaway militarism and runaway welfare-ism.”

At approximately 5:50 - “It was never meant for the Federal Reserve to have free reign and not have any oversight whatsoever. And we have to realize that this whole issue of central banking is not a new issue. It was here from the very beginning. Hamilton and Jefferson argued about it, Jefferson and Jackson, and many others were absolutely opposed to central banking . So it’s not a new issue, but there is no authority in the Constitution that grants this right to have a central bank and to create money out of thin air just to accommodate the politicians. We have a right and an obligation and a responsibility for oversight of the Federal Reserve. And our responsibility is to look at bad policy. The Federal Reserve is responsible for the inflation, and the business cycle, the unemployment – it is up to us to do something about it.”

According to Dr. Paul, the Federal Reserve has hired lobbyists and launched a Public Relation campaign for support their position.

I think it’s clearly a necessity for us to have transparency with an independent bank that can print money at will without any Congressional oversight.

Illinois Wiretapping Laws Upheld – Recording Police Still Illegal

Recently, a Federal District Court Judge, Suzanne Conlon, dismissed a challenge by the ACLU in Illinois that questioned the Illinois law that makes recording someone with their consent, on public property, a felony. Doing so can be punishable by up to fifteen years in prison. While this law applies to all recording without consent, it has been specifically used against citizens who record police officers.

Charges against individuals for recording police officers on public property are not uncommon. For example, Michael Allison from Bridgepoint, Illinois, faces potential prison time for recording on-duty Illinois police officers. Read about it in Reason’s, The War On Camera’s.

In Illinois, it is against the law to use any “eavesdropping device” to record a phone call or any conversation without the consent of all parties involve. This law has been in place for some time, and is among the strictest. Illinois is one of a handful of states with similar laws. To see if your state’s “wiretapping” laws, check out LibertyActivim’s state wiretapping law summary. According to the law, only audio recordings are against the law; video recordings are fair game. Of course, this law only applies to citizen’s who wish to record in public, not to law enforcement officials. For more on the Illinois wiretapping law, read the page at the Citi Media Law Project. There is also an additional summary of Illinois recording rights here.

While it makes sense for state’s to protect privacy by preventing audio and visual recordings of private conversations on private property, it seems irrational to require consent for anyone who might be present on public property. If we take a look at the expectation of privacy on public property, we can easily conclude that there is no expectation of privacy. If there’s no expectation of privacy on public property, what sense does it make to have a law that “protects privacy” on public land?

The law has been used primarily against citizens who record police officers on public property. I personally find it unsettling not only that one can’t audio record on public property without consent of all parties involved, but that we cannot audio record police officers. I think being able to record law enforcement is beneficial for the community because it adds transparency and accountability. It allows us to know what police officers are doing and make’s it easier to see abuses of power. Without the ability to record law enforcers, it becomes very easy for a rouge officer to break the law or otherwise abuse his power. Police abuse of power is already an issue; by making it even more difficult to track the actions of police officers we place ourselves even more within the hope that they are of good character.

Society should encourage audio and video recording of police officers and other public officials. We have the right to know what our “public servants” are doing and to keep them accountable. Furthermore, does not prohibiting of recording imply potential wrongdoing? While much of the time the officer may be doing his duty as he should, a police officer’s fear of the camera suggests that they may not want the public to know of their actions. What do they have to hide?

I am of the opinion that it should always be lawful to record police officers as party of our freedom of press and free speech. Doing so encourages accountability and discourages corruption and abuse of power. Though we in Illinois can still technically video record police officers (it’s only audio recording that’s illegal), it’s still very easy for a police officer to intimidate and make your turn off your camera under the guise of interfering with police or obstructing justice. Without the ability to lawfully record law enforcement, we suffering the risk of even more abuse of power.

Patriot Act Soon to be Renewed

We all want to feel safe. We want to feel the government is protecting us, but at the same time we want to feel that our freedoms are preserved. The Patriot Act infringes upon our civil liberties under the guise of security. Portions of the bill are soon up for renewal, and it has gotten there with very little press. It appears it will go renewed silently, without opposition.

The Patriot Act, originally passed in George W. Bush’s presidency in 2001, greatly reduced the privacy of Americans. Law enforcement agencies love this act because it gives them the ability to monitor telephone and email communications, as well as financial records much more easily than ever before in the history of the United States. As I’m sure most of you are aware, it’s intended to help curb terrorism (including domestic terrorism). The act passed easily in Congress, where it was supported by Republicans and Democrats. Interestingly, George Bush took some negative criticism over the Patriot Act, primarily from Democrats, despite the fact that many Democrats supported the bill. The bill was reauthorized in July, 2005 and passed into law in 2006.

The Patriot Act indeed threatens the fundamental civil liberties of Americans. One of the problems with the Patriot Act is that it is very broad and can apply not only to terrorists, but to suspected terrorists, lawful citizens, and essentially anyone deemed as a potential or suspected terrorist. Who defines what a terrorist is? Who comes up with the criteria? It should be obvious how easily this can be abused. This is only among the most obvious flaws of the Patriot Act. It has allowed the creation of things such “sneak and peak warrants,” wiretapping without a warrant, indefinite detention of immigrants, and several other atrocities.

President Obama renewed three provisions of the Act about a year ago. It’s now up for renewal again.

There is a good summary of the bill here, by the ACLU, that details the problems with the bill. You can also view an analysis of it by CATO, here. Within the bill, they detail roving wiretaps that allow the government to spy on individuals and even raid any place an individual has been over the past year. Section 215 allows the seizure of whatever records they want, including email, phone, and financial records. They don’t even have to let you know they’re doing this.

For those interested, a petition can be found here.

Good intentions often have negative, unintended consequences, and this is absolutely the case with the USA Patriot Act. Yes, we want to feel safe, but at what cost? I believe the cost here is far too high. When society allows such freedom for law enforcement and, consequently, such a loss of civil liberties and privacy, we should expect for our rights to only continue to be eroded. The Patriot Act has been in existence for ten years. Recently we’ve seen the installation of body scanners and more invasive pat-downs at airports. What’s next? It’s a wonder we don’t have such security at bus stations and malls yet. How long until the idea of a warrant is accepted as a foreign concept? Trading our freedom for security is a mistake we will have to pay for in the future.

Unfortunately, it’s the path America has chosen to walk.

Will Illinois Join the Ranks of Medical Marijuana States?

With fifteen states already having some form of medical marijuana law, and several new states drafting similar laws, it’s no surprise that Illinois has joined the ranks of those trying to pass such laws through state legislatures, despite being notorious for marijuana arrests, which are the sixth highest in the country.

A bill narrowly passed the Senate on May 27th, 2009 in Illinois. The bill’s status can be viewed here, and the actual text of the bill here. It subsequently cleared the House subcommittee, came up for a vote in the State House, but was not passed or denied. It will likely be revoted upon early next year. Currently, the Illinois General Assembly lists the bills status as “Placed on Calendar – Consideration Postponed.”  The bill will be repealed three year after going into law unless it is reapproved. If passed, the bill will go in law on July 1st, 2011.

Who will be able to use medical marijuana? It appears that Illinois will be much more restrictive than some states that have embraced medical cannabis, namely California, where almost anyone can get a cannabis registry card. Some say cannabis can and should be a medical treatment from severe to moderate conditions, including things such as depression and insomnia. Illinois will restrict medical marijuana to a much narrower group of patients.

Senate Bill 1381, also dubbed the Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Pilot Program Act, allow “physicians” to recommend medical marijuana to qualified patients, namely those suffering from “debilitating conditions,” permitting them to possess up to two ounces of cannabis and up to seven plants, only three of which may be mature or flowering. The Public Health Department would issue registry cards for caregivers and their patients. Plants must be grown in a secure facility, and cannabis would not be allowed to be smoked in public or on school property.

They define debilitating medical condition as one of the following: cancer, glaucoma, HIV positive, acquired immune deficiency syndrome, hepatitis C, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Crohn’s disease, agitation of Alzheimer’s disease, nail patella, or “the treatment of these conditions.” The bill then goes on to define various symptoms or side effects that can result in a cannabis “prescription.” Among these are seizures, severe muscle spasms, intractable pain, severe debilitating nausea, or other medical conditions or treatments approved by the Department of Public Health.

In sort, the Act has the following restrictions:

“Provides that the Act does not: (i) allow the use of cannabis if that person does not have a serious or debilitating medical condition; (ii) allow any person who is not allowed to use cannabis under the Act to use cannabis that a cardholder is allowed to possess pursuant to the Act, (iii) transfer cannabis to any person who is not allowed to possess cannabis under the Act.”

Medical marijuana supporters from the Marijuana Policy Project have begun airing radio ads in Chicago, Peoria, the Quad Cities, and Rockford asking citizens to support this initiative. You can hear the ad here. According to a recent poll, 68% of the state supports legalization for medical use, while it is estimated that less than half support complete legalization. The MPP provides an easy way to contact your representative and let them know where you stand. If you support this pill, please do so.

I support the passage of the medical bill, but when will we set our sites higher? I don’t think a patient should be prosecuted for using marijuana as a medicine. But I find it equally appalling for someone to be arrested for recreational use. What right does a government, any government, or any entity have to tell someone else what they can or cannot put in their body? The notion is primitive, immoral, and absurd. I do think that the national medical marijuana movement, as well as some decriminalization we’ve seen, is a movement in the right direction. To those of you who no longer buy into governmental propaganda and unfounded social stigma, thank you. You give me hope that a free society is possible.

Again, if you live in Illinois, please contact your state Representative and let them know that you support this bill. Tell them you think they should vote yes. Calling is preferred, but even an email helps.

  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Facebook