1995年国会听证会
情报和安全

Testimony of Representative David E. Skaggs on H.R. 1710, "Comprehensive Antiterrorism Act of 1995" Committee on the Judiciary June 12, 1995 Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your courtesy in providing me with this opportunity to briefly address one aspect of the very important anti terrorism bill the committee is considering today. I agree with the President and with members on both sides of the aisle that Congress should take additional steps to prevent terrorism and to make punishment for terrorists swifter and more certain. The tragic bombings in Oklahoma City and two years earlier in New York City awakened all of us to the fact that America is not immune to terrorist acts. It is essential for Congress to see that we are doing all we should do to prevent any repetition of those terrible crimes. At the same time, discussion of stepped-up counter terrorism efforts has also aroused public concerns that law enforcement agencies may tend to slip over proper Constitutional boundaries in combating terrorism -- that their actions to keep us safe may sometimes collide with the Constitution's wise restraints that keep us free. To address those concerns, I joined with our colleague from New Mexico, Steve Schiff, in introducing H.R. 1738, the "Constitutional Rights Oversight Act." I think that adding the provisions of our bill to H.R. 1710 would help bring an important balance to anti terrorism legislation. As with all law enforcement efforts, in fighting terrorism the government must balance the need for public safety and security with individual rights and liberties, those of innocent citizens especially. Sadly, our history provides several examples of the federal government compromising basic Constitutional rights to thwart perceived national security threats. The FBI's clandestine "cointelpro" program provides but one stark example of such governmental arrogance. In the name of national security, then-director J. Edgar Hoover presided over a program of unauthorized surveillance and harassment of those who legitimately protested government policies. Given this history, there are serious concerns in the country about giving expanded investigative powers to federal authorities. To respond to those concerns, H.R. 1738 would establish a independent and top-level inspector general for counter terrorism activities, to be responsible for ensuring that federal counterrorism activities comply with Constitutional standards. The most important feature of this new inspector general would be the cross-cutting scope of the authority of the office. Unlike the existing inspectors general of various departments, this new officer would have oversight authority over the counterterrorism work of agencies as diverse as the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. In short, this new inspector general would have the authority not simply to review the actions of one department, but to watch the counterterrorism activities of all agencies, to assure their adherence to the Constitution and their full respect for Constitutional rights. Besides the power to review, under our bill the new inspector general would have the power to act, in three significant ways: First, agencies would be required to keep this new inspector general informed of requests for judicial or administrative authorization for searches, wiretaps, and similar surveillance activities. The new inspector general would be kept similarly informed about deportation actions related to the fight against terrorism. In connection with all these proceedings, the new inspector general could make suggestions, or question the requested surveillance or deportations, to the extent appropriate in order to protect Constitutional rights. Second, the new inspector general would receive public complaints about alleged or potential violations of Constitutional rights. Upon receiving these complaints, the inspector general could require relevant agencies to respond. Finally, the new inspector general would be responsible for submitting periodic reports to the president and the Congress concerning the observance of Constitutional requirements, and the protection of Constitutional rights, in connection with federal counterterrorism activities, and to make suggestions for improvements. Just as important as these particular powers, Mr. Chairman, would be the restraining effect of the mere existence of such an independent inspector general. The requirements for immediate Constitutional accountability that the office would impose on tendency a government official might have to be casual about Constitutional safeguards. Mr. Chairman, the american public has a very real stake in being protected from terrorism. it also has a high stake in seeing that the government doesn't cut Constitutional corner in providing that protection. We do not need to trade our Constitutionally-protected rights, including the rights to privacy, free assembly, and free speech, for enhanced protection from terrorists. If we should make that mistake, terrorism will have achieved a victory. To avoid that result, Mr. Chairman, I urge the committee to include the provisions of H.R. 1738 in any anti terrorism measure your Committee reports to the House. In that way, the Committee and the House can demonstrate our commitment to protecting both public safety and personal freedom while providing the right response to the public's fears both of violence and of government abuse of civil rights. A nation which so rightly reveres its constitution deserves no less from its government.