Expired Security Act Jeopardizes America’s Safety
- Mar 4, 2008 - 4
Americans were propelled into a dark world the morning of September 11, 2001, confronted by an enemy intent on extinguishing the flame of freedom that has made our nation great.
Yet in the midst of such tragedy, America rose above evil and demonstrated her greatness. In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, Americans laid aside socio-economic divisions and political differences and united as a nation of prayer. They also resolved to do that which was necessary to prevent another attack on U.S. soil.
If you believe intelligence agencies should be given the tools to help protect Americans, please tell House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to schedule a vote on the Senate-passed Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and urge your representative to support the bill.
As a part of those efforts to protect our nation, several telecommunications companies began lending their assistance to intelligence agencies by tracking communications with known or suspected terrorists. This computerized surveillance tracks telephone numbers, not actual conversations, from which individuals regularly dial those who are believed to be plotting harm against us. Thanks to their patriotism, our intelligence agencies have used this information to thwart several possible attacks.
This surveillance, however, has since been deemed unauthorized, prompting a litany of lawsuits against telecommunications companies that assisted the government. The Protect America Act, a critical albeit short-term modernization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) passed in August, restored the government’s authority to conduct electronic surveillance on our enemies without first obtaining a special court’s approval and provided legal protections for telecommunications companies to assist in monitoring. Unfortunately, this law expired on Feb. 16.
The Senate passed an update to FISA last month with strong bipartisan support, 68-29, authorizing the surveillance to continue and providing retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies while also ensuring the protection of Americans’ civil liberties. The House leadership, however, has refrained from scheduling the bill for a vote, despite its support from both sides of the aisle.
The adverse effects on America’s nation security without an amended FISA should concern every American. In a letter sent Feb. 22 to a House committee on intelligence, Attorney General Michael Mukasey and Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell stated, “We have lost intelligence information this past week as a direct result of the uncertainty created by Congress’ failure to act.”
Telecommunications companies—already facing hundreds of billions of dollars in class-action suits for helping to protect Americans from attacks in the wake of 9/11—will be less likely to assist the government upon future requests to provide information quickly. Further, allowing these lawsuits to proceed would require disclosure of key intelligence, thereby aiding our enemies.
ERLC President Dr. Richard Land, in an action alert Monday calling for renewal of the surveillance program, noted: “Liberals in Congress appear more interested in empowering the lawyers to sue the telecommunications companies than they are in providing for the security of United States citizens.”
More than six years after 9/11, some in Congress have grown all too comfortable with the idea that such an act of evil could not possibly happen again. The truth is we are battling foreign extremists who play by their own set of rules and show no regard for human life. To help keep America safe, the private sector must be permitted to continue partnering with the government.
If you believe intelligence agencies should be given the tools to help protect Americans, please tell House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to schedule a vote on the Senate-passed Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and urge your representative to support the bill.
Click Here for Dr. Land’s Action Alert on Foreign Surveillance
Further Learning
Learn more about: Citizenship, Legislation, National, War
Comments are closed. Please use our contact form if you have any thoughts or questions.
comments
1 On Mar 5th, 2008, at 11:49am, Richard Cheek wrote:
I objected to this when I received the action alert and that objection still stands. The ERLC and its leader are using Cooperative Program funds to promote one side of a purely partisan political issue. Whether you are for or against the Intelligence Foreign Surveillance Act should have no bearing on whether you consider this to be an appropriate use of funds by an SBC agency.
2 On Mar 5th, 2008, at 12:45pm, Matt wrote:
RE: Richard Cheek,
A Senate vote of 68-29 seems hardly “purely partisan”.
3 On Mar 5th, 2008, at 2:38pm, Richard Cheek wrote:
In a body as evenly divided as the senate, when 100% of the opposition is from one party, I would call it a partisan issue. But that really isn’t the point of my complaint. I would not care if it had passed unanimously, it is still not an appropriate subject to take a “biblical” stand on.
4 On Mar 5th, 2008, at 4:50pm, Matt Hawkins wrote:
RE: “...when 100% of the opposition is from one party, I would call it a partisan issue.”
Fair enough. But by that reasoning, do you mean that when any given issue is made “partisan” by, as you defined it, 100% opposition is by one party or another, SBC-ers should keep quite?
If this is not what you mean, then I suggest that the “partisanship” of any given issue should not determine whether or not SBC-ers engage an issue. After all, the abortion debate has clearly become as a “partisan” issue by that reasoning. Should the ERLC stop “promoting one side” on that issue?
But to your main point… I understand you to say that Southern Baptists should not be voicing their opinion on policies that directly relate to a government’s biblical responsibility to protect its people and “punish the evil doer?” This is, after all, a national security issue, agreed?
Or does the Bible have nothing to say on that front?