Earlier this week, a Justice Department official told the Washington Post that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, as part of his effort to get the Patriot Act renewed, would support some minor revisions, including changes to access to library data.
This was, to be sure, welcome news. There have been reports of FBI investigators visiting dozens of libraries, asking for reading records, and defending their methods by hiding behind the Patriot Act. Now that the law is being revisited, and reevaluated, it was reassuring to learn that this provision is poised to be changed.
Or is it? Despite the Post report, when Gonzales went to the Hill to lobby on behalf of the Patriot Act, his interest in revising the policy towards libraries seemed to fade.
Specter was strongly critical of the business records and secret search provisions, referring to them as overly broad and intrusive. He challenged the administration to defend the provisions and explain why they should not be changed. “I think there has to be a little give on some of these issues,” Specter said.
Specifically, Specter asked Gonzales if he would support rewriting the business records section to exclude library and medical records. The government has “no interest in rummaging through the library records or the medical records of Americans,” Gonzales replied.”
“Does that mean you would agree to excluding them?” Specter asked.
Gonzales appeared to hedge his response.
This needn’t be complicated. Dems don’t like the library provision, Specter doesn’t like it, civil libertarians (from both sides of the aisle) don’t like it, and the DoJ indicated it was on the table. But when push comes to shove, Gonzales is noncommittal?
Seems like a simple yes-or-no question. If Gonzales is unwilling to answer it, the whole Patriot Act reauthorization process might get even more contentious. As someone who’s been skeptical about the law all along, I wonder if that might be a good thing.