The Police State Enhancement Act of 2003
by Geov Parrish
Last Friday night, PBS's "Bill Moyers: Now" program aired a report on a
leak to a DC advocacy group 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 1991'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 web site of CPI (www.publicintegrity.org), or at
Moyers' web site (www.pbs.org/now/).
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 bill to
have as little time for exposure to Congressional and public scrutiny as
possible before it was rammed into law. Exposed to sunlight, this thing
starts stinking in a hurry. Like 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 even 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 absurd leap of declaring the US
to be at war against terrorist groups rather than nation states or their
militaries--enables the US, 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 activity even
if it is lawful if it is in support of a group the US deems to be
terrorist. This, again, also allows use on the new ex-citizen of 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: "Requiring the
... 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 essentially is 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 US 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 US 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 meritorious, 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, deserve 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.
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.
|