October 14, 2001

[Letter to my senators, both of who voted for the TRAITOR Act.]

"I believe there are more instances of abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpation." - James Madison, 1778

As I'm sure you're aware, in addition to some completely noncontroversial commonsense actions the version of the so-called "Anti-terrorism" act recently passed by the Senate contains several provisions that raise concerns about civil liberties. Sifting through all the pronouncements leading up to the final vote (I do not use the term "debate" because it was much too one-sided and much too rushed to deserve the description) I find nothing in those provisions that leads me to believe that had the bill been in force earlier that the events of September 11 would not have happened. That is, not one such provision has been able to withstand the simple question "Would this have made any difference?"

The fact is, in the weeks since September 11, it's become clear that as a security matter, the attacks didn't happen because of a lack of police powers or security provisions but because of a failure to use those that already existed. Adding more such powers, more authority to invade our privacy, restrict our freedoms, track our movements, more ability to substitute suspicion for proof - all while reducing judicial oversight - only creates more opportunities for official abuse. Despite the hypnotic mantra about "improving our security while protecting our liberties" this bill is nothing more than one of Madison's "gradual encroachments."

I would have expected you to be among those who realized that, who would have stood with those who decried this unseemly rush to judgment, who would resist risking our liberties for the sake of sloganeering. Apparently, I was wrong.

I am deeply distressed.