Since the USA PATRIOT Act was enacted shortly after 9/11, I have met with many constituents and countless groups to discuss the details of this controversial legislation. Last year, I hosted a town hall meeting to hear what my constituents thought about the USA PATRIOT Act. While some agreed that the Act was necessary to prevent another terrorist attack, most of the crowd, as well as most Rhode Islanders, believed we have already ceded too much ground with respect to our civil liberties. In my state, seven cities and towns have passed resolutions opposing parts of the USA PATRIOT Act, and my constituents understand what this bill means to them and their freedom.

Last week, the 9-11 Commission released a report card on the implementation of the group’s recommendations. For “balance between security and civil liberties,” the government received a “B,” which is a high grade considering they were given more “Fs” than “As.” However, the report card cautioned that “robust and continuing oversight, both within the Executive and by the Congress, will be essential.” We should strive to move closer to A than F, but this conference report does not accomplish that goal. By making 14 of the 16 expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act permanent, I worry that Congress will be less likely to engage in vigorous oversight to protect the civil liberties of law abiding Americans.

The Senate proved that it is possible protect both lives and liberties. Their legislation made permanent the less controversial portions of the Act, but implemented common sense changes to add a layer of protection for liberties while keeping America safe. Unfortunately, most of these improvements were not incorporated into the conference report. For instance, the Senate version required the government to show that a person is connected to terrorism or espionage before investigators could obtain medical, library or business records. The bill before us permits the government to go on fishing expeditions to look for information without probable cause. In addition, the Senate required new, strong protections for “sneak and peak” searches and roving wiretaps. These improvements are also absent from the conference agreement. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the motion to recommit, which asks conferees to adopt the bipartisan Senate language.

I recognize the need for our laws to keep pace with new technology and a changing world, and I am committed to ensuring our law enforcement has the tools they need to keep our nation safe. However, providing these tools need not come at the expense of the liberties and freedoms that we hold so dear. If we cede these, we have already given up the very values the terrorists are trying to destroy.

I am disappointed that conferees have decided to once again place partisanship over sound policy. Working together, we make America stronger, but Congress has again divided the American people. I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing H.R. 3199 and instead working to reauthorize the USA PATRIOT Act in a way that protects both our liberties and our country.