This was a post that I had intended to start writing last week. Since last week was dominated by health care discussions though, this might get more attention. Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner is in my opinion the best candidate for the Senate in Ohio, and I have previously laid out her views on Jobs, Afghanistan and Choice as well as her strong support in Ohio's African-American communities. Her website is pretty through on the important issues facing this country now, but I saw an area that she didn't cover and so I contacted her campaign and they somewhat promptly gave me an answer. Now, I will share her statement on the Patriot Act in its entirety and I'll give my thoughts on it. I will also talk about Brunner's courageous stands for the people of Ohio and why I am pledging $25.00 of my own money to her this Friday.
I received the following statement just as I posted my last Brunner diary to Daily Kos.
Statement on Patriot Act:
By: Jennifer Brunner, Ohio Secretary of State and Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate (Ohio)
March 12, 2010
Less than two weeks ago, President Obama signed a temporary extension of three controversial provisions of the Patriot Act that would have expired the next day. The provisions due to expire were:
Lone wolf: The "lone wolf" provision allows government to track a non-U.S. individual without any apparent affiliation to a foreign entity such as an international terrorist group; although, the provision has reportedly not been used.
Business records: The "business records" provision allows government investigators to force third parties, including financial, transportation and telephone companies, to provide records on suspects without their knowledge.
Roving wiretap: The "roving wiretaps" provision allows the government to tap phone lines or Internet accounts that a suspected terrorist may be using, even if non-suspects also regularly use them. To take advantage of this provision, the government must provide the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court with specific information suggesting a suspect is trying to evade detection by purposely diverting to other methods of communication.
This is unfortunate, to put it politely, (which the Patriot Act is not for many Americans). Democratic-sought protections for the civil liberties and privacy rights of American citizens, based on documented abuses of the Act in its present form, were left out of the bill because of the threat of Republican filibuster which would have delayed the Act past its expiration. Republicans argued that these protections would detract from the ability of the country's intelligence agencies to hunt down terrorists. Congress, including many Democrats, punted the issue to President Obama, who signed the act. This was described by many as a Republican victory, but the American public was the loser.
I am in agreement with U.S. Rep Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)’s assessment: "As Members of Congress sworn to protect the rights and civil liberties afforded to us by the Constitution, we have a responsibility to exercise our oversight powers fully, and significantly reform the PATRIOT Act, ensuring that the privacy and civil liberties of all Americans are fully protected," he said. "More than eight years after the passage of the PATRIOT Act, we have failed to do so. As National Journal correspondent Shane Harris recently put it, we have witnessed the rise of an 'American Surveillance State.' We have come to love our fears more than we love our freedoms.http://rawstory.com/...
In my words, "Surgical tools perform better than machetes and sledgehammers when pursuing and capturing terrorists in our populated midst. We need to honestly examine how the PATRIOT Act has been applied, how it has affected everyday Americans. We must assess how we can and must use changing technology to identify and track persons suspected of terrorism without sacrificing the rights of innocents. Congress, and especially the Senate, must legislate with more creativity, insight and courage when protecting the civil liberties of the American public. We cannot cling to our fears at the expense of our freedoms. We can pursue terrorist suspects in our midst without maiming the freedoms of our Constitution that make us so uniquely American and once made us known even Ronald Reagan called the ‘shining city upon a hill whose beacon light guides freedom-loving people everywhere.’" http://findarticles.com/...
http://washington.bizjournals.com/...
First, I hadn't really heard before which provisions were extended, and Brunner did a great job of explaining them, and why they are so troublesome. The "lone wolf" provision is one that even Blue Dogs like Congresswoman Jane Harman of California think it should expire. The "business records" and "roving wiretap" provisions are likely to be abused by law enforcement officials if there are no accountability measures or an open and transparent judicial process to oversee it. Brunner is right about Congress punting the issue to the President, and that shows a lack of courage by the Democrats in the House and Senate. I have an instinctual revulsion to the Patriot Act, given how little it was debated when it passed, the abuses that law enforcement have done against peace groups during the run-up to the War in Iraq and the first few years thereafter, and the whole unhealthy "need" for secrecy that pervades the whole thing. I would be tempted to just junk the whole thing, but then I am not a politician. I don't know everything about the Patriot Act and it is possible that significant reform like what Kucinich says could be the best solution politically and policy wise. Brunner's words are also quite effective as she closes it. Civil liberties should not be sacrificed out of fear.
Brunner has been outspoken from the start about the need for more civil rights laws as they relate to sexual orientation and gender identity, which is why Cleveland's Stonewall Democrats have endorsed her. Her primary opponent on the other hand only started talking about marriage equality when he started into this race. Keep in mind it was the New York Stonewall Dems that finally rid us of the horrid Ford Senate candidacy, and that Cleveland is the home turf of Brunner's primary opponent. So he has neither the African-Americans of Cleveland nor the GLBT community of Cleveland. That is a bad omen for Brunner's opponent and shows that Brunner will turn out the base of Ohio Democrats. As a pro-marriage equality site shows, Brunner has been fighting for the rights of GLBT persons for many years.
On June 10, 2009, she wrote an Op-ed voicing her longtime support for marriage equality: "In 1988, I applied for an appointment to the City Council of Columbus, Ohio. I was not chosen, but I chuckle when I think of the calls I received to vet me for the post. One of them was from the leader of a very conservative sect of our local Democratic party. He wanted to know if I supported legislation being considered by city council to allow domestic partnership benefits. I told him that if same-sex couples were permitted to be married, we wouldn't need such special legislation, and that I would prefer to see that. I don't think that was the answer he was looking for or expected."
Gay rights is THE civil rights question of the 21st Century and the sooner our country passes ENDA(Employment Non-Discrimation Act), repeals the Defense of Marriage Act(DOMA) and Don't Ask, Don't Tell(DADT), the better. The time is now. Brunner gets that, and I am confident that if she is elected Senator, she'd lead in that fight. Brunner has already shown leadership in cleaning up elections in Ohio and standing up to the likes of Diebold and endured the smears of being associated with ACORN.
Finally, this Friday is Brunner's Victory for Courage "money bomb". I pledge to give her $25 out of my own funds because she will be one ore voice for progressives in the Senate, one more voice for women who are underrepresented, and she is one more voice for common sense. Ohio residents, I cannot vote for her since I live in Massachusetts, so you will have to vote for her in my stead. I am very envious that Ohioans have such a great candidate to vote for.
Cross-posted to Progressive Electorate and Peanut Butter PAC