H. Rept. 112-79 – FISA Sunsets Reauthorization Act of 2011

112th Congress                                             Rept. 112-79
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                     Part 1

======================================================================



 
                FISA SUNSETS REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2011

                                _______
                                

                  May 18, 2011.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

       Mr. Smith of Texas, from the Committee on the Judiciary, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 1800]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 1800) to temporarily extend expiring provisions of 
the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 
relating to access to business records and roving wiretaps and 
to permanently extend expiring provisions of the Intelligence 
Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 relating to 
individual terrorists as agents of foreign powers, having 
considered the same, reports favorably thereon without 
amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     2
Background and Need for the Legislation..........................     2
Hearings.........................................................     3
Committee Consideration..........................................     4
Committee Votes..................................................     4
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................    10
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................    10
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................    10
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................    12
Advisory on Earmarks.............................................    12
Section-by-Section Analysis......................................    12
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............    12
Dissenting Views.................................................    13

                          Purpose and Summary

    H.R. 1800 reauthorizes three provisions of the Foreign 
Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that are scheduled to 
sunset on May 27, 2011. Under the bill, the business records 
provision, as enacted by Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act, 
and the roving wiretaps provision, as enacted by Section 206 of 
the USA PATRIOT Act, are authorized until December 31, 2017. 
The FISA lone wolf definition, enacted by Section 6001 of the 
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 
(IRTPA), is permanently authorized.

                Background and Need for the Legislation

    In response to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, 
Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the USA 
PATRIOT Act. That act, which amended FISA, was intended to 
ensure that law enforcement agencies and the intelligence 
community have the tools they need to stop and deter future 
terrorist attacks.
    The Section 215 business records authority allows the 
Federal government to seek approval from the FISA Court of 
orders granting the government access to any tangible items 
(including books, records, papers, and other documents) in 
foreign intelligence, international terrorism, and clandestine 
intelligence cases. This authority is similar to the widely-
used grand jury subpoena authority in criminal investigations. 
However, business records, which by definition reside in the 
hands of a third party, do not implicate the Fourth Amendment.
    There are numerous protections written into FISA to ensure 
that the business records authority is not misused. Under 
Section 215, only an Article III FISA judge can issue an order 
for business records; an investigation of a U.S. person cannot 
be based solely on activities protected by the First Amendment; 
the records must be for a foreign intelligence or international 
terrorism investigation; and minimization procedures must be 
used. In addition, requests for certain records--including 
library circulation, book sales, and firearms sales records--
must first be approved by the FBI Director, the Deputy 
Director, or the head of the FBI's National Security Division.
    The Section 206 roving wiretap provision authorizes FISA 
Court orders for multipoint or ``roving'' wiretaps in foreign 
intelligence investigations. A ``roving'' wiretap applies to an 
individual and allows the government to a use a single wiretap 
order to cover any communications device that the target uses 
or may use. Without roving wiretap authority, investigators 
would be forced to seek a new court order each time they need 
to change the location, phone, or computer that needs to be 
monitored. Roving wiretap authority has been available for 
criminal investigations since 1986.
    In order to use a roving wiretap, intelligence agents must 
first establish, and the FISA Court must approve, all of the 
criteria for a traditional wiretap. These include probable 
cause that the target of the surveillance is a foreign power or 
agent of a foreign power and probable cause that the device is 
being used or about to be used by a foreign power or agent of a 
foreign power. Then the agents must also show, and the FISA 
Court must also agree, that the actions of the target may have 
the effect of thwarting their identification. Once a roving 
warrant is approved, the government must also notify the FISA 
Court within 10 days after beginning surveillance on a new 
phone or computer.
    The ``lone wolf'' provision is a definitional change 
intended to address the growing threat from individual 
offenders. The provision allows the government to track a 
foreign national who engages in acts to prepare for a terrorist 
attack against the U.S. but is not affiliated, or cannot 
immediately be shown to be affiliated, with a foreign terrorist 
organization. The lone wolf definition cannot be used to 
investigate U.S. persons, and only applies in cases of 
suspected international terrorism.
    To date, the government has never used the lone wolf 
provision, which critics use as justification to let the 
provision expire. This provision, however, is a crucial tool 
against the growing threat of individual foreign terrorists 
working alone in the United States. Some critics also argue 
that the government can use Title III criminal wiretaps to 
monitor lone wolf terrorists. Criminal wiretaps, however, are 
ill-suited for use in intelligence operations for a number of 
reasons. First, criminal wiretaps are authorized under the 
presumption that the information collected will be used as 
evidence in a trial and turned over to targets when they become 
defendants in a criminal case. By contrast, FISA wiretaps are 
used to collect foreign intelligence information that may never 
be used in an Article III criminal trial. Second, unlike 
criminal wiretaps, FISA wiretaps protect the sources and 
methods of the government surveillance. This is crucial when 
dealing with matters of national security. Third, criminal 
wiretaps require ``live minimization'' to ensure that the 
government does not improperly surveil protected activities. 
However, live minimization is impossible in foreign 
intelligence collection because most of the information 
captured by FISA wiretaps is in a foreign language. Information 
collected under FISA is recorded live, but is later translated 
by linguists at the intelligence agencies. Under this approach, 
there is no opportunity for the government to ``minimize'' 
information as it is collected.
    Attorney General Eric Holder and FBI Director Robert 
Mueller both requested in hearings before the Committee on the 
Judiciary that Congress reauthorize these three provisions. The 
Committee also received letters in support of reauthorizing the 
three expiring provisions from the FBI Agents Association, the 
Society of Former Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, Inc., the Federal Law Enforcement Officers 
Association, the Sergeants Benevolent Association (Police 
Department, City of New York), the National Association of 
Assistant United States Attorneys, the National District 
Attorneys Association, the National Fraternal Order of Police, 
the Major County Sheriffs' Association and Keep America Safe.

                                Hearings

    The Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, 
Terrorism, and Homeland Security held three hearings on the USA 
PATRIOT Act on March 9, 2011, March 30, 2011, and May 11, 2011. 
Testimony was received from: Mr. Todd Hinnen, U.S. Department 
of Justice; Mr. Robert S. Litt, Office of the Director of 
National Intelligence; Professor Nathan Sales, George Mason 
University; Mr. Julian Sanchez, Cato Institute; Mr. Kenneth 
Wainstein, O'Melveny & Myers, LLP; Mr. Michael German, American 
Civil Liberties Union; Mr. Patrick Rowan, McGuireWoods LLP; The 
Honorable Bob Barr, former Member of Congress; Mr. Bruce Fein, 
Campaign for Liberty; and Sergeant Ed Mullins, Sergeant 
Benevolent Association of New York City. Additional materials 
were submitted by: the American Civil Liberties Union, Keep 
America Safe, the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, 
the Federal Bureau of Investigation Agents Association, the 
Cato Institute, the Sergeants Benevolent Association of New 
York City, the Society of Former Special Agents of the FBI, the 
National Association of Assistant United States Attorneys, and 
the Association of State Criminal Investigative Agencies. The 
Committee on the Judiciary held no legislative hearings on H.R. 
1800.

                        Committee Consideration

    On May 12, 2011, the Committee met in open session and 
ordered the bill H.R. 1800 favorably reported without 
amendment, by a roll call vote of 22 to 13, a quorum being 
present.

                            Committee Votes

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the 
following roll call votes occurred during the Committee's 
consideration of H.R. 1800.
    1. An amendment by Mr. Conyers to prohibit an application 
for a 215 business record order requiring the production of 
library and bookseller records. Defeated 10-17.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Smith, Chairman.............................................                              X
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................                              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................                              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................                              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................                              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................                              X
Mr. Chabot......................................................                              X
Mr. Issa........................................................
Mr. Pence.......................................................                              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................                              X
Mr. King........................................................                              X
Mr. Franks......................................................                              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................
Mr. Jordan......................................................                              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................                              X
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................                              X
Mr. Griffin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Marino......................................................                              X
Mr. Gowdy.......................................................
Mr. Ross........................................................
Ms. Adams.......................................................                              X
Mr. Quayle......................................................
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member................................              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................              X
Ms. Waters......................................................
Mr. Cohen.......................................................
Mr. Johnson.....................................................
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................              X
Mr. Quigley.....................................................              X
Ms. Chu.........................................................              X
Mr. Deutch......................................................              X
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             10              17
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. An amendment by Ms. Jackson Lee to extend the lone wolf, 
roving wiretap, and business records provisions until December 
31, 2014. Defeated 11-20.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Smith, Chairman.............................................                              X
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................                              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................                              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................                              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................                              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................                              X
Mr. Chabot......................................................                              X
Mr. Issa........................................................                              X
Mr. Pence.......................................................                              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................                              X
Mr. King........................................................
Mr. Franks......................................................                              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................
Mr. Jordan......................................................                              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................                              X
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................                              X
Mr. Griffin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Marino......................................................                              X
Mr. Gowdy.......................................................                              X
Mr. Ross........................................................                              X
Ms. Adams.......................................................                              X
Mr. Quayle......................................................                              X
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member................................              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................              X
Ms. Waters......................................................
Mr. Cohen.......................................................
Mr. Johnson.....................................................              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................              X
Mr. Quigley.....................................................              X
Ms. Chu.........................................................              X
Mr. Deutch......................................................              X
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             11              20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. An amendment by Ms. Jackson Lee to require the President 
to submit a report to relevant congressional committees on FISA 
court secrecy. Defeated 11-20.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Smith, Chairman.............................................                              X
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................                              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................                              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................                              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................                              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................                              X
Mr. Chabot......................................................                              X
Mr. Issa........................................................                              X
Mr. Pence.......................................................                              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................                              X
Mr. King........................................................
Mr. Franks......................................................                              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................
Mr. Jordan......................................................                              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................                              X
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................                              X
Mr. Griffin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Marino......................................................                              X
Mr. Gowdy.......................................................                              X
Mr. Ross........................................................                              X
Ms. Adams.......................................................                              X
Mr. Quayle......................................................                              X
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member................................              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................              X
Ms. Waters......................................................
Mr. Cohen.......................................................
Mr. Johnson.....................................................              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................              X
Mr. Quigley.....................................................              X
Ms. Chu.........................................................              X
Mr. Deutch......................................................              X
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             11              20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. An amendment by Mr. Nadler to raise standards for the 
collection, pursuant to section 215, of personally identifiable 
records held by libraries and booksellers. Defeated 11-21.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Smith, Chairman.............................................                              X
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................                              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................                              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................                              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................                              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................                              X
Mr. Chabot......................................................                              X
Mr. Issa........................................................                              X
Mr. Pence.......................................................                              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................                              X
Mr. King........................................................                              X
Mr. Franks......................................................                              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................
Mr. Jordan......................................................                              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................                              X
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................                              X
Mr. Griffin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Marino......................................................                              X
Mr. Gowdy.......................................................                              X
Mr. Ross........................................................                              X
Ms. Adams.......................................................                              X
Mr. Quayle......................................................                              X
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member................................              X
Mr. Berman......................................................              X
Mr. Nadler......................................................              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................
Mr. Cohen.......................................................              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................              X
Mr. Quigley.....................................................              X
Ms. Chu.........................................................              X
Mr. Deutch......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             11              21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. An amendment by Mr. Johnson to require that, if a FISA 
target's identity is not known, that the surveillance 
application to describe the target ``with particularity.'' 
Defeated 11-18.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Smith, Chairman.............................................                              X
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................                              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................
Mr. Gallegly....................................................                              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................                              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................                              X
Mr. Chabot......................................................                              X
Mr. Issa........................................................                              X
Mr. Pence.......................................................
Mr. Forbes......................................................                              X
Mr. King........................................................                              X
Mr. Franks......................................................                              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................
Mr. Jordan......................................................                              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................                              X
Mr. Griffin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Marino......................................................                              X
Mr. Gowdy.......................................................                              X
Mr. Ross........................................................                              X
Ms. Adams.......................................................                              X
Mr. Quayle......................................................                              X
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member................................              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................
Mr. Cohen.......................................................              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................              X
Mr. Quigley.....................................................              X
Ms. Chu.........................................................              X
Mr. Deutch......................................................              X
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             11              18
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. An amendment by Ms. Chu to allow petitions to challenge 
nondisclosure to be brought immediately and makes other changes 
to the procedures for Sec. 215 nondisclosure orders; and an 
amendment to institute annual Audits by the Inspector General 
to Congress for years 2006-2007. It also institutes an annual 
unclassified report by the Attorney General on how the powers 
under this act are used. Defeated 12-19.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Smith, Chairman.............................................                              X
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................                              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................                              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................                              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................                              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................                              X
Mr. Chabot......................................................                              X
Mr. Issa........................................................                              X
Mr. Pence.......................................................
Mr. Forbes......................................................                              X
Mr. King........................................................
Mr. Franks......................................................                              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................                              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................                              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................                              X
Mr. Griffin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Marino......................................................                              X
Mr. Gowdy.......................................................                              X
Mr. Ross........................................................                              X
Ms. Adams.......................................................                              X
Mr. Quayle......................................................                              X
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member................................              X
Mr. Berman......................................................              X
Mr. Nadler......................................................              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................
Mr. Cohen.......................................................              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................              X
Mr. Quigley.....................................................              X
Ms. Chu.........................................................              X
Mr. Deutch......................................................              X
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             12              19
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. An amendment by Mr. Quigley to permit the Attorney 
General to ban the sale of firearms to any individual who, 
based on information collection under FISA, is or has been 
engaged in terrorist acts, if the Attorney General also has a 
reasonable suspicion that the firearm would be used in 
connection with terrorism. Defeated 11-21.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Smith, Chairman.............................................                              X
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................                              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................                              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................                              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................                              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................                              X
Mr. Chabot......................................................                              X
Mr. Issa........................................................                              X
Mr. Pence.......................................................                              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................                              X
Mr. King........................................................
Mr. Franks......................................................                              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................                              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................                              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................                              X
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................                              X
Mr. Griffin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Marino......................................................                              X
Mr. Gowdy.......................................................                              X
Mr. Ross........................................................                              X
Ms. Adams.......................................................                              X
Mr. Quayle......................................................                              X
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member................................              X
Mr. Berman......................................................              X
Mr. Nadler......................................................              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................
Mr. Cohen.......................................................              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................              X
Mr. Quigley.....................................................              X
Ms. Chu.........................................................              X
Mr. Deutch......................................................              X
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             11              21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. Motion to order the bill favorably reported without 
amendment. Approved 22-13.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Smith, Chairman.............................................              X
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................              X
Mr. Chabot......................................................              X
Mr. Issa........................................................              X
Mr. Pence.......................................................              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................
Mr. Franks......................................................              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................              X
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................                              X
Mr. Griffin.....................................................              X
Mr. Marino......................................................              X
Mr. Gowdy.......................................................              X
Mr. Ross........................................................              X
Ms. Adams.......................................................              X
Mr. Quayle......................................................              X
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................                              X
Mr. Nadler......................................................                              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................                              X
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................                              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................                              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................                              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................              X
Mr. Quigley.....................................................              X
Ms. Chu.........................................................                              X
Mr. Deutch......................................................                              X
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................                              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             22              13
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the 
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on 
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the 
descriptive portions of this report.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives is inapplicable because this legislation does 
not provide new budgetary authority or increased tax 
expenditures.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth, with 
respect to the bill, H.R. 1800, the following estimate and 
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                      Washington, DC, May 18, 2011.
Hon. Lamar Smith, Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1800, the ``FISA 
Sunsets Reauthorization Act of 2011.''
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark 
Grabowicz, who can be reached at 226-2860.
            Sincerely,
                                      Douglas W. Elmendorf,
                                                  Director.

Enclosure

cc:
        Honorable John Conyers, Jr.
        Ranking Member
H.R. 1800--FISA Sunsets Reauthorization Act of 2011.
    CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1800 would have no 
significant costs to the Federal Government. Enacting the bill 
could affect direct spending and revenues; therefore, pay-as-
you-go procedures apply. However, CBO estimates that any 
effects would be insignificant for each year.
    CBO has determined that the provisions of H.R. 1800 are 
either excluded from review for mandates under the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act because they are necessary for national 
security or they contain no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined by that act.
    The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 
2004 (Public Law 108-458) and the USA PATRIOT Improvement and 
Reauthorization Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-177) expanded the 
powers of Federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies to 
investigate and prosecute terrorist acts. H.R. 1800 would 
extend or make permanent certain provisions of those acts that 
would otherwise expire later this month.
    Because those prosecuted and convicted under H.R. 1800 
could be subject to civil and criminal fines, the Federal 
Government might collect additional fines if the legislation is 
enacted. Collections of civil fines are recorded in the budget 
as revenues. Criminal fines are recorded as revenues, deposited 
in the Crime Victims Fund, and later spent. CBO expects that 
any additional revenues and direct spending would not be 
significant because of the small number of cases likely to be 
affected.
    On March 31, 2011, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 
193, the USA PATRIOT Act Sunset Extension Act of 2011, as 
reported by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary on March 17, 
2011. The two bills contain similar provisions to extend the 
Federal Government's current authority to investigate terrorist 
acts. However, S. 193 also would require audits and reports by 
the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the intelligence community 
and would rescind unobligated balances from the DOJ's Assets 
Forfeiture Fund. The cost estimates reflect the differences 
between the two bills.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Mark Grabowicz. 
The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, H.R. 
1800 authorizes Section 215 business records and Section 206 
roving wiretap authority until December 31, 2017, and 
permanently authorizes FISA's lone wolf definition.

                          Advisory on Earmarks

    In accordance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, H.R. 1800 does not contain any 
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff 
benefits as defined in clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of Rule XXI.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

    The following discussion describes the bill as reported by 
the Committee.
Section 1: Short Title
    Section 1 provides that H.R. 1800 may be cited as the 
``FISA Sunsets Reauthorization Act of 2011.''
Section 2: Extension of Sunsets of Provisions Relating to Access to 
        Business Records, Individual Terrorists as Agents of Foreign 
        Powers, and Roving Wiretaps
    Section 2 temporarily extends the authorization of Section 
215 business records collection and roving wiretaps until 
December 31, 2017. Section 2 also permanently extends the 
authorization for the lone wolf provision.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

      In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made 
by the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change 
is proposed is shown in roman):

        USA PATRIOT IMPROVEMENT AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2005



           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
TITLE I--USA PATRIOT IMPROVEMENT AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 102. USA PATRIOT ACT SUNSET PROVISIONS.

    (a) * * *
    (b) Sections 206 and 215 Sunset.--
            (1) In general.--Effective [May 27, 2011] December 
        31, 2017, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 
        1978 is amended so that sections 501, 502, and 
        105(c)(2) read as they read on October 25, 2001.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


        INTELLIGENCE REFORM AND TERRORISM PREVENTION ACT OF 2004



           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
                     TITLE VI--TERRORISM PREVENTION

     Subtitle A--Individual Terrorists as Agents of Foreign Powers

SEC. 6001. INDIVIDUAL TERRORISTS AS AGENTS OF FOREIGN POWERS.

    [(a) In General.--Section] Section 101(b)(1) of the Foreign 
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801(b)(1)) is 
amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
                    ``(C) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    [(b) Sunset.--
            [(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph 
        (2), the amendment made by subsection (a) shall cease 
        to have effect on May 27, 2011.
            [(2) Exception.--With respect to any particular 
        foreign intelligence investigation that began before 
        the date on which the provisions referred to in 
        paragraph (1) cease to have effect, or with respect to 
        any particular offense or potential offense that began 
        or occurred before the date on which the provisions 
        cease to have effect, such provisions shall continue in 
        effect.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                            Dissenting Views

                              INTRODUCTION

    H.R. 1800 is a missed opportunity. This legislation deals 
with three surveillance powers set to expire on May 27, 2011--
the ``lone wolf'' definition for individual terrorist suspects, 
the ``Section 215'' business records collection power, and the 
roving wiretap authority. Members on both sides of the aisle 
have expressed serious concerns with each of these provisions, 
but the bill addresses none of these misgivings. It makes no 
substantive changes to the PATRIOT Act whatsoever. The Majority 
could have worked to reach consensus and craft a compromise 
that improves the underlying law. Instead, they chose to ignore 
differing opinions and push through a bill that does not make a 
single correction or adopt even those amendments that enjoy 
bipartisan support.

        CONCERNS ABOUT H.R. 1800 AND THE EXPIRING PROVISIONS OF 
                          THE USA PATRIOT ACT

    The USA PATRIOT Act raises serious questions about the 
proper balance between individual liberty and government 
authority. The three specific surveillance powers that expire 
on May 27 are not the most controversial portions of the law, 
but they do raise significant concerns.\1\ Reauthorization 
would have provided an important opportunity for Congress to 
reevaluate and improve these authorities. H.R. 1800 instead 
extends the expiring provisions without addressing any of the 
concerns that have been raised.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\The issues raised below relate to unclassified uses of these 
authorities. Committee members have been briefed on classified matters 
that also raise civil liberties questions. Those concerns, of course, 
may not be aired in this public report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concerns regarding Section 215
    Relevance is too broad a standard. Section 215 allows the 
government to seize virtually any record or information from 
any person or business in the United States simply by showing 
the information is ``relevant'' to a national security 
investigation.\2\ In addition, the statute says that certain 
categories of information are ``presumptively relevant''--
including any information that ``pertains'' to a person ``in 
contact with, or known to, a suspected agent of a foreign 
power.'' Under Section 215, information can be collected about 
any innocent American, who is not suspected of terrorism or 
anything else, simply if it is relevant to an investigation of 
some other person or group. This includes highly personal 
information such as library records and reading history, 
medical records, and social networking information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\50 U.S.C. Sec. 1861(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ranking Member Conyers and Rep. Nadler each offered 
amendments that would provide specific protections to libraries 
and booksellers. The Conyers amendment would have prohibited 
intelligence agencies from making a Section 215 demand for 
``library circulations records, library patron lists, book 
sales records, [and] book customer lists.'' The limitation 
would have applied only to Section 215; all of these records 
would have remained available to law enforcement via normal 
criminal investigation processes. Notably, the Ranking Member--
joined by Rep. Nadler, Rep. Ron Paul, and Rep. Walter Jones--
introduced an identical amendment to the Continuing Resolution 
debated on the House floor this past February. At that time, 32 
Republicans--including Reps. Adams and Chaffetz
--voted in favor of the proposal.\3\ At the markup, Reps. Adams 
and Chaffetz reversed their position, and the amendment was 
defeated by a party line vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\H.R. 1, Roll Call Vote 95, 112th Cong., Feb. 18, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Rep. Nadler offered a modified version of this amendment. 
Under his proposal, library and bookseller records are only 
available under Section 215 with ``a statement of specific and 
articulable facts showing . . . reasonable grounds to believe 
that the records sought are relevant to an authorized 
investigation to obtain foreign intelligence information,'' and 
that the records have a sufficient nexus to a suspected 
terrorist or foreign agent. The amendment would have raised the 
Section 215 standard from mere ``relevance'' and provided a 
basic layer of protection to the privacy of individual 
citizens. Simply put, ``Americans do not want the government 
looking into what they read.''\4\ Nonetheless, the amendment 
was again defeated on a party vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\Markup of H.R. 1800, FISA Sunsets Reauthorization Act of 2011, 
H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 112th Cong., May 12, 2011 (remarks of Rep. 
Sensenbrenner) (unofficial transcript).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ``Presumptive Relevance'' is unreasonable. The Section 215 
statute makes certain categories of information ``presumptively 
relevant''--including any information that ``pertains'' to a 
person ``in contact with, or known to, a suspected agent of a 
foreign power.''\5\ This presumption--which cannot be 
challenged or rejected by the Court--is sweeping. For example, 
if the child of a foreign diplomat (``an agent of a foreign 
power'') attended a birthday party at a classmate's home, the 
Section 215 presumptive relevance standard could enable the FBI 
to obtain any information that ``pertains'' to that classmate's 
family, including bank records, drivers license files, or 
workplace personnel files. Similarly, if a suspect of a 
terrorism investigation viewed a person's public Facebook page, 
or responded to a classified advertisement, the FBI could 
likely use a Section 215 order to collect all of that person's 
online records.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\50 U.S.C. Sec. 1861(b)(2)(i)-(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Intelligence operations are not the same as ordinary 
criminal investigations. Although the Section 215 authority is 
similar to the subpoena power held by grand juries, the 
procedural checks that deter abuse in the criminal context do 
not necessarily apply in the intelligence context. First, 
evidence seized with a criminal subpoena is intended for use in 
court, whereas Section 215 orders may be used for long term 
intelligence gathering with no expectation of courtroom 
proceedings. Thus, while the exclusionary rule and criminal 
discovery obligations deter abusive or overreaching use of 
subpoenas in the criminal context, there is no comparable 
deterrent to abuse in intelligence operations. In addition, 
Section 215 orders come with powerful nondisclosure (or 
``gag'') rules which can prevent the subject of a Section 215 
order from ever knowing their private information has been 
taken by the government. In markup, Rep. Chu offered an 
amendment that would have limited these gag orders and given 
citizens an immediate right to challenge the legality of a 
Section 215 order in a court of law. The amendment was defeated 
on party lines.
    The Justice Department Inspector General has identified 
problems with the use of Section 215 orders. Recent reports 
published by the DOJ Inspector General have identified a number 
of improper or otherwise problematic 215 orders.

         LIn one case, the FBI obtained a Section 215 
        order for information regarding a telephone line that 
        was not actually used by the subject of the 
        investigation. According to the Office of the Inspector 
        General, ``this resulted in the FBI receiving 
        unauthorized information, which is called `over 
        collection,' between March 2005 and October 2005.''\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\DOJ Office of the Inspector General, A Review of the Federal 
Bureau of Investigation's Use of Section 215 Orders for Business 
Records, at page xii (March 2007).

         LIn another case, the FBI was collecting 
        information about a certain telephone line. During this 
        time, the phone company assigned the number to a 
        different person, but failed to inform the FBI of this 
        fact for several weeks. As a result, the FBI used its 
        Section 215 authority to collect information about an 
        innocent person who was not connected to the 
        investigation.\7\ There is no suggestion that the over 
        collection here was intentional, but that does not 
        necessarily lessen the personal intrusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\DOJ Office of the Inspector General, A Review of the Federal 
Bureau of Investigation's Use of Section 215 Orders for Business 
Records, at page xii (March 2007).

         LIn April 2005, the FBI learned that a source, 
        who had provided significant information about the 
        target of a Section 215 order, had changed his mind and 
        no longer believed that the target was involved with a 
        particular terrorist group. However, this changed 
        information was not reported to the FISA court until 
        January 2006, prompting the court to demand an 
        explanation of the failure to timely report this 
        information.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\DOJ Office of the Inspector General, A Review of the Federal 
Bureau of Investigation's Use of Section 215 Orders for Business 
Records, at page xiii (March 2007).

    The Justice Department's Inspector General is currently 
conducting a review of the use of Section 215. It is 
irresponsible to pass an unprecedented 6-year extension of this 
authority without the benefit of the information contained in 
the forthcoming audit.
Concerns regarding Roving Wiretaps
    The risk of tapping the wrong person is too high in the 
FISA context. Roving wiretap authority is commonly used in the 
criminal context and is not especially controversial. However, 
FISA authorizes the government to obtain roving power by 
providing a ``description of the target'' if the person's 
identity is not known. This loose standard increases the 
likelihood that the wrong person will accidentally be targeted 
for FISA wiretapping.
    This concern is heightened in the intelligence context 
where the lack of notice to the suspect and the focus on 
intelligence gathering, rather than eventual prosecution, 
create poor incentives and undermine deterrents to abuse.
    In markup, Rep. Johnson offered an amendment that would 
have required law enforcement to describe the target ``with 
particularity'' before a warrant may for a roving wiretap. The 
amendment would have merely codified current practice--the 
Department of Justice has testified that it already provides 
the court with sufficient detail to describe a target with 
particularity.\9\ The government has, in essence, conceded that 
this assurance of privacy will have no impact on its 
operational flexibility. Nonetheless, the Majority defeated the 
amendment on party lines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\Hearing on the Reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act, H. Comm. on 
the Judiciary, Subcomm. on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, 
March 9, 2011 (testimony of Acting Attorney General Todd Hinnen, 
Department of Justice, National Security Division).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concerns Regarding Lone Wolf Surveillance
    FISA powers are not necessary to investigate individual 
lone actors. FISA brings extraordinarily intrusive search and 
surveillance powers to bear on the targets of national security 
investigations, including inside the United States. Those 
intrusions are justified in part on the grounds that the target 
is a foreign government or terrorist group or other significant 
power. But lone wolf brings these powers to bear on single 
individuals if they are suspected of ``acts in preparation'' 
for international terrorism.
    FISA's constitutionality depends in part on the fact that 
its search and seizure powers apply in grave national security 
matters, rather than in ordinary criminal investigation. In 
2009, national security law expert Suzanne Spaulding testified 
that allowing FISA powers to be used via lone wolf in what may 
be rather mundane criminal investigations puts the 
constitutionality of FISA at risk. \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\Testimony of Suzanne Spaulding before the House Committee on 
the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and 
Civil Liberties, at 11-15, September 22, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Lone Wolf has never been used. The executive branch has 
never used the lone wolf provision. Without this authority, 
they would retain ample means under our robust criminal 
investigatory system to deal with single individuals suspected 
of terrorist acts or preparation therefore. We appreciate that 
some Members feel we should retain the lone wolf provision even 
though it has not proven necessary during the last 7 years of 
heightened terror threats. The record of non-use suggests, 
however, that--at a minimum--a new sunset is needed to ensure 
effective oversight and reporting to Congress on this novel 
power. Making this provision permanent when it has no track 
record is simply reckless.

       THE MAJORITY HAS BEEN UNWILLING TO NEGOTIATE OR COMPROMISE

    On March 30, 2011, in a subcommittee oversight hearing on 
the ``Permanent Provisions of the PATRIOT Act,'' Ranking Member 
Conyers began his opening statement with a fair and 
uncontroversial request:

        [W]e come here today to request of you that we have 
        another meeting on this subject without the 
        distinguished witnesses that are here where we can 
        discuss some of the unclassified and classified 
        materials that would be the subject of such a meeting. 
        I am fully aware that the month after next we are going 
        to have to dispose of this matter, and I think that 
        this would be a very important meeting in terms of 
        reaching some kind of consensus about where we are. . . 
        . I would like this discussed here today, of course, 
        but I would like us to meet with the Committee in a 
        non-public hearing on that issue.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\Hearing on the Permanent Provisions of the PATRIOT Act, H. 
Comm. on the Judiciary, Subcomm. on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland 
Security, March 30, 2011 (remarks of Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr.).

    In past months, Committee Democrats have sought 
opportunities to discuss the PATRIOT Act. Each time, the 
Majority was unwilling to meet or unwilling to discuss 
substantive changes to the underlying law.
H.R. 1805--A Better Vehicle for Consensus
    There is a better way to craft legislation. A responsible 
legislative effort based on winning broad support--rather than 
forcing through a controversial bill on party line votes--would 
have allowed consideration of concerns raised by members of 
both parties but that fall outside the narrow scope of H.R. 
1800.
    To this end, Ranking Member Conyers introduced H.R. 1805, 
the ``USA PATRIOT Sunset Extension Act of 2011.'' The bill is 
cosponsored by Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, Ranking Member of the 
House Permanent Subcommittee on Intelligence. It represents a 
responsible effort to improve the expiring authorities while 
preserving their operational utility.
    H.R. 1805 is the companion to S. 193, a bipartisan measure 
crafted by Senator Patrick Leahy and reported out of the Senate 
Judiciary Committee earlier this year.\12\ It embodies an 
approach that has the ready support of the executive branch and 
the intelligence community. At a PATRIOT Act hearing before the 
Crime Subcommittee earlier this year, for example, General 
Counsel of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence 
stated that ``I think the provisions in [S. 193] are examples 
of the kinds of provisions . . . that would provide enhanced 
protection for civil liberties without affecting operational 
utility.''\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\See S. Rep. 112-13 to accompany S. 193, ``The USA PATRIOT 
Sunset Extension Act of 2011,'' April 11, 2011.
    \13\Hearing on the Reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act, H. Comm. on 
the Judiciary, Subcomm. on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, 
March 9, 2011 (response of Robert Lit to a question by Ranking Member 
Conyers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Unlike the Majority's bill, H.R. 1805 directly addresses 
many of the concerns raised by the use of the PATRIOT Act. It 
does not allow any of the expiring provisions to lapse. It 
includes reasonable 2\1/2\ year sunsets for all three 
authorities. It provides heightened protection for libraries 
and booksellers, but does not bar collection of even this 
sensitive information. It tightens standards for roving 
wiretaps, while allowing roving authority to still be used. It 
eliminates the overbroad presumption of relevance in Section 
215, and requires a thorough statement of facts to be presented 
in support of all Section 215 applications--but does not 
otherwise heighten the basic Section 215 standard. And it fixes 
a number of constitutional and practical problems with Section 
215 nondisclosure orders, while allowing appropriate secrecy to 
be maintained.
    H.R. 1805 also strengthens National Security Letter 
processes, requiring creation and retention of better NSL 
records, improving NSL nondisclosure order practices, and 
placing a sunset on NSLs. The bill also coordinates a number of 
surveillance authorities sunsets so that the whole range of 
interrelated intelligence tools can be considered together in a 
comprehensive manner next time around, rather than in bits and 
pieces, year by year.
H.R. 1800 Follows Past Practice for the Majority
    For a decade, House Republicans have promised open debate 
and compromise on the PATRIOT Act. Instead, the Majority has 
reneged on deals with House and Senate Democrats, walked away 
from the bargaining table, and created a hostile environment 
for Members and witnesses who disagree with the scope and reach 
of the bill.
    In 2001, within days of the September 11 attacks, Attorney 
General John Ashcroft announced that the Justice Department 
would draft a bill outlining new powers needed for the federal 
government to fight terrorism. A subsequent hearing held on 
September 24, 2001, was so rushed that the Attorney General 
would not submit to a full round of questions by the members. 
Nonetheless, the Committee worked out a compromise with the 
Bush Administration. On October 3, 2001, the Committee reported 
out H.R. 2975 by a unanimous 36-0 vote.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\H.R. Rep. No. 236, 107th Cong., 2d Sess. (2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While H.R. 2975 was being prepared for floor consideration, 
and in the middle of the 2001 anthrax scare on Capitol Hill, 
the Administration reneged on its deal. Chairman Sensenbrenner 
introduced a new and more aggressive version of the bill that 
became the basis for the final PATRIOT Act. Compromise talks 
were abandoned. At no point was the Committee permitted to 
consider this version of the legislation.
    This Congress, the Majority dropped H.R. 1800 late on a 
Friday afternoon, while the House was in pro forma session and 
members were in their districts. The bill ignores concerns 
raised by both members of both parties. It has never had the 
benefit of a legislative hearing. From this lack of notice, and 
from the lack of respect shown to differing opinions throughout 
this process, we can only conclude that the Majority cannot be 
expected to meaningfully negotiate--with members of either 
party--to resolve the many outstanding concerns we have with 
this legislation.

           THERE IS STRONG BIPARTISAN OPPOSITION TO H.R. 1800

    Opposition to this bill runs wide and deep across the 
political spectrum. Traditional defenders of civil liberties 
oppose the bill because it extends (or makes permanent) these 
surveillance authorities without any additional protections for 
privacy and civil liberties. These opponents include the 
American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier 
Foundation.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\The PATRIOT Act has long been opposed by civil liberties and 
law reform organizations. In 2005, for example, the following groups 
opposed re-authorization: The Center for Constitutional Rights, the 
American Conservative Union, American Immigration Lawyers Association, 
American Library Association, the Center for Democracy and Technology, 
Common Cause, Free Congress Foundation, Gun Owners of America, Lawyers' 
Committee for Civil Rights, National Association for the Advancement of 
Colored People (NAACP), National Association of Criminal Defense 
Lawyers, People for the American Way, the American-Arab Anti-
Discrimination Committee, American Association of Law Libraries, 
American Baptist Churches USA, American Humanist Association, American 
Policy Center, Americans for Tax Reform, Arab American Institute, Asian 
Americans for Equality, Asian American Legal Defense & Education Fund, 
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Association of 
Research Libraries, Bill of Rights Defense Committee, Center for Human 
Rights and Constitutional Law, Center for Justice and Accountability, 
Center for National Security Studies, Chicago Committee to Defend the 
Bill of Rights, Commission on Social Action of Reform Judaism, Consumer 
Action, Doctors for Disaster Preparedness, Electronic Privacy 
Information Center, First Amendment Foundation, F.I.R.S.T. Project, 
Inc., Friends Committee on National Legislation, Hate Free Zone 
Campaign of Washington, Immigrant Defense Project of the New York State 
Defenders Association, Immigrant Legal Resource Center, International 
Institute of Boston, Japanese American Citizens League, Korean Resource 
Center, Latin American Integration Center, Lawyers Committee for Human 
Rights, League of United Latin American Citizens, Mennonite Central 
Committee U.S., Washington Office, Mexican American Legal Defense and 
Educational Fund (MALDEF), Multiracial Activist, National Asian Pacific 
American Legal Consortium, National Coalition Against Repressive 
Legislation, National Council of La Raza, National Employment Law 
Project, National Immigration Law Center, National Lawyers Guild, New 
York Immigration Coalition, Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, OMB 
Watch, Organization of Chinese Americans, Police Accountability 
Project, Presbyterian Church USA, Washington Office, and the Special 
Libraries Association. See Dissenting Views regarding H.R. 3199 
(109th), House Report 109-174 at 444.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We have also seen a powerful new wave of conservative 
opposition to the overreaching government surveillance 
authorized by the PATRIOT Act. When the first PATRIOT Act 
reauthorization was brought to the floor this Congress, it was 
defeated on suspension, with 26 Republicans voting against.\16\ 
Weeks later, Reps. Conyers, Nadler, Paul and Jones offered a 
bipartisan amendment to the Republican continuing budget 
resolution that would have protected libraries and booksellers 
from having their records seized, which received 32 Republican 
votes on the floor.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\Roll Call 26 on H.R. 514 (112th Congress) (February 8, 2011).
    \17\Roll Call 95 on Amendment 524 to H.R. 1 (112th Congress) 
(February 18, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Since then, numerous Republicans and conservatives have 
spoken out against the approach reflected in this legislation. 
For example, our former Colleague Bob Barr of Georgia testified 
at a recent hearing before the Subcommittee on Crime, 
Terrorism, and Homeland Security that:

        ``I understand the Chairman introduced legislation last 
        week that would make the so-called `lone-wolf' 
        authority in the USA PATRIOT Act permanent; and would 
        extend the Section 215 and roving `John Doe' wiretap 
        authorities in the Act for another 6 years, until 2017. 
        I urge this committee to reject this approach tomorrow 
        during its markup, and either amend these sections in 
        order to bring them into full compliance with the 
        letter and the intent of our Constitution, or else 
        allow them to expire.''\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\Prepared Testimony of Hon. Robert Barr at a ``Hearing on the 
USA PATRIOT Act: Dispelling the Myths,'' before the Subcomm. on Crime, 
Terrorism, and Homeland Security of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary 
(112th Cong.) (May 11, 2011).

Bruce Fein, a conservative scholar and former Reagan 
Administration official, also testified against the PATRIOT 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Act. Mr. Fein explained:

        ``Despite the good intentions of its architects, the 
        PATRIOT Act betrays bedrock constitutional principles. 
        The individual is the center of the Constitution's 
        universe. Aggrandizing government is the center of the 
        PATRIOT Act. The Constitution salutes freedom and 
        citizen sovereignty over absolute safety and citizen 
        vassalage. The PATRIOT Act turns that hierarchy on its 
        head.''\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\Prepared Testimony of Bruce Fein at a ``Hearing on the USA 
PATRIOT Act: Dispelling the Myths,'' before the Subcomm. on Crime, 
Terrorism, and Homeland Security of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary 
(112th Cong.) (May 11, 2011).

And Senator Rand Paul released a letter to his colleagues 
stating his opposition to extending these authorities. Senator 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul wrote:

        ``The USA PATRIOT Act, passed in the wake of the worst 
        act of terrorism in U.S. history, is no doubt well-
        intentioned. However, rather than examine what went 
        wrong, and fix the problems, Congress instead hastily 
        passed a long-standing wish list of power grabs like 
        warrantless searches and roving wiretaps. The 
        government greatly expanded its own power, ignoring 
        obvious answers in favor of the permanent expansion of 
        the police state. It is not acceptable to willfully 
        ignore the most basic provisions of our Constitution--
        in this case the Fourth and First Amendments--in the 
        name of `security.'''\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\Letter from Senator Rand Paul to Colleagues at 1-2 (February 
15, 2011). Many other conservatives have opposed the bill. CATO 
Institute research fellow Julian Sanchez testified at a March 9, 2011, 
Judiciary Subcommittee hearing that ``these emergency powers should not 
be made permanent until they are further tailored to ensure that the 
tools employed to investigate and apprehend terrorists are consistent 
with our Constitutional tradition of respect for the privacy and civil 
liberties of innocent Americans.'' And conservative lawyer John 
Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute recently published his 
opposition, arguing ``the freedoms in the Bill of Rights are being 
eviscerated, and if they are not restored and soon, freedom as we have 
known it in America will be lost. Thus, whether it's a short-term or 
long-term scenario, Congress should not renew the USA Patriot Act, nor 
should President Obama sign it into law.'' Whitehead, Renewing the 
Patriot Act: Who Will Protect Us From Our Government (May 16, 2011).

    The opposition to H.R. 1800 even has a strong base within 
the House Republican caucus. Citing a need ``to evaluate, 
amend, improve, and potentially replace all provisions of the 
PATRIOT Act, not just the three provisions at issue here,'' 
Rep. Chaffetz stated: ``I have at least three specific 
concerns, and look forward to incorporating your concerns with 
mine as I draft amendments during the hearing and markup 
process.''\21\ Indeed, Judiciary Republicans filed six 
amendments to H.R. 1800 in advance of the markup.\22\ Some of 
these amendments were identical to proposals offered by the 
Minority; others were compromise measures that would have 
likely enjoyed substantial bipartisan support. All of these 
Republican amendments were withdrawn overnight.\23\ Every 
Democratic amendment, even those closely resembling Republican 
proposals, was voted down along party lines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\Press Release, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, ``Renewal of PATRIOT Act 
Provisions,'' Feb. 23, 2011 (available at http://chaffetz.house.gov/
legislative-issues/2011/02/renewal-of-patriot-act-provisions.shtml).
    \22\The Committee's rules permit members of both parties to review 
proposed amendments at least a day before markup begins. H. Comm. on 
the Judiciary, 112th Cong. Rules of Proc., Rule II(f). Rep. Issa ``pre-
filed'' two amendments to H.R. 1800. Rep. Chaffetz pre-filed four 
amendments. The Majority did not permit the Committee to consider any 
of these proposals at markup.
    \23\See John Bresnahan and Jake Sherman, ``GOP Struggles for 
PATRIOT Act Votes,'' Politico, p. 1, May 12, 2001. ``House Republican 
leaders are aggressively lobbying rank-and-file GOP lawmakers to pass a 
long-term extension of the PATRIOT Act, a Bush-era anti-terrorism law 
that has already provided Republicans with an embarrassing defeat early 
in their majority.'' Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee favorably reported H.R. 1800 by a vote of 22-
13, with Republican Jason Chaffetz of Utah voting against. The 
Majority may succeed in their attempt to push through another 
aggressive PATRIOT Act reauthorization--but they will face 
substantial and bipartisan opposition, and they will have 
missed an opportunity to reach consensus on this bill.

                                   John Conyers, Jr.
                                   Jerrold Nadler.
                                   Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott.
                                   Melvin L. Watt.
                                   Sheila Jackson Lee.
                                   Maxine Waters.
                                   Steve Cohen.
                                   Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr.
                                   Judy Chu.
                                   Ted Deutch.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.