The USA Patriot Act: Taking Away Our Rights and Invading Our Libraries

Imagine a country where at any moment someone may bust down your door and take anything they like. This person is not a burglar. This person is from your government. Well here, in the United States of America, the land of the free, this can happen to anyone. Perhaps even now, writing this, I am under surveillance. The government may be listening to my phone calls, reading my emails, and retrieving other information about me and my family. Why might my family be a danger to the citizen of the USA? Well my mother is half Lebanese, and I, her college aged daughter, am doing a few research projects. Being Middle Eastern and simply looking up words I do not understand could be reason to hold me, without telling me why I am being held. This change from "the Land of the Free" is caused by the USA PATRIOT Act.

The USA PATRIOT Act was put in place after the attacks on the United States of America on September 11, 2001. While the Patriot Act was a relief to many after the attack, much of the public has changed opinions and is ready for the act to be removed. Section 215 is one of the most strongly opposed pieces, and for good reason. It states that the director of the FBI may seize "any tangible things (including books, records, papers, documents, and other items) for an investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities," providing that "such investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution" (USA section 215). Section 215 also has a secrecy clause, which prevents anyone requested of information from telling any person or organization. The Patriot Act, specifically section 215 needs to be amended or removed. The American Civil Liberties Union states that the USA PATRIOT Act violates the First Amendment because, "it allows the government to easily obtain information about, for example, the books people read, the Web sites they visit, and the religious institutions they attend and support" (Wheeler 4).

Section 215 also holds the rights to medical, legal, and other types of information. This section affects many businesses, but no others so much as librarians. Personal records have been taken, along with computer log in sheets and in one case, the hard drive to a computer (Wheeler 11). Many librarians believe strongly in expanding minds, and the Patriot Act makes this a much more risky thing to do. The Patriot Act asks librarians to break their ethical standards to "protect" citizens or the United States, which many are opposed to. Some libraries have taken extreme measures to follow the law and prevent the government from getting information by deleting all information off computers daily and deleting files after a book has been returned (Wheeler 9). Libraries should not have to sneak around to protect their users.

Wheeler, an Associate Professorat the School of Library and Informations Sciences at the University of North Texas,states that "The consequences are even more serious when considering that future generations of adults may become reluctant to explore their intellectual curiosities or express their opinions openly" (5). As many libraries hold political meetings, they may also be affected there. Wheeler also stated that "under the PATRIOT Act, assembling for the purpose of criticizing the government could now be considered a crime, even when violence is not advocated" (5). This means that people at a simple debate about current issues could be charged with crimes against the state. The Department of Justice report states that no libraries have been forced to give over information under a 215 order, (Facts 1) yet 545 libraries have reported in a survey that they have been, though doing so is illegal under the Patriot Act (Oder 1).

The USA PATRIOT Act is history repeating itself. Before 1954, African Americans could not use public libraries, and in the 1950's homosexual librarians working at the Library of Congress were fired. During the 70's and 80's the Library Awareness Program tracked library use of people with Eastern European or Russian ancestry, which was only stopped after the FBI reported this, causing a great deal of response from the public (Wheeler 3). Now the same types of suspicions are placed upon those of Middle Eastern descent.

A new survey by the Library Research Center at the University of Illinois showed that librarians are divided over giving up users' records. The publication shows that 49% of the 444 libraries voluntarily provided information (GME 1). Perhaps these records could save someone's life. Robert Hauptman did an experiment asking reference librarians in 13 different libraries on the properties of the explosive cordite. While doing this he also implied that a house was going to be blown up. Each of the librarians helped him find the information he requested without even blinking their eyes. In another experiment a man asked for information on how to freebase cocaine, which is the base form of cocaine, and much easier to smoke. He received 100% cooperation (Cramb 1). In cases like these, especially the first, it may be much advisable to have the Patriot Act in effect, or a rule allowing librarians to report extremely suspicious activity. Unfortunately, the line is hard to draw between potential criminal activity and plain curiosity. For example, I may now be a suspect in drug smuggling or in drug dealing for simply looking up what freebasing cocaine means.

US Attorney General John Ashcroft, in a speech at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, said that "We have used the tools provide in the Patriot Act to fulfill our first responsibility to protect the American people...We have used these tools to provide the security that ensures liberty" (Rush 1). While he is correct on the fact that we must be secure to continue to have our country, it does not have to be done through our libraries. Libraries are a place of learning, and to some, a place of relaxation. Instead of digging through piles of information at the library, the FBI should focus its attention where it would do more good. Instead of waiting at the library for people curious about explosives, why don't they make the explosives harder to find and harder to buy? There are many other possible ways to prevent terrorism. Making people afraid to criticize the government will not help our government change. People who are afraid to indulge their curiosities will not grow. This USA PATRIOT Act world is not a healthy one, and will not help America thrive.

The traditional librarian is taught not to make moral judgments or try to impress their opinions on others (Cramb 1). This is backward from most people, and many other jobs, and therefore librarians hold rights much higher than the general public, especially those on "right to know." News editor Newman Oder states that "While two-thirds of those in the general population said that the government should remove information from web sites that might potentially help terrorists... barely more than one-third of librarians agreed" (1). These librarians have also gone through the falling of the World Trade Centers, yet they have a completely different view on how terrorism should be dealt with, and it is certainly not through libraries. May libraries eventually be told what books they are not allowed to house? We need to stop the government's intrusion on our First Amendment rights, before it goes too far.

Almost 60 percent of respondents to survey by the Library Research Center at the University of Illinois said they thought the secrecy provision of the Patriot Act abridges their personal First Amendment rights. The USA PATRIOT Act notes in section 215 that "no person shall disclose to any other person (other than those persons necessary to produce the tangible things under this section) that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained tangible things under this section." This, on top of the frustration of many librarians who want to follow both the laws and their library ethics, seems to be the final straw.

American Conservative Union Chairman David Keene says that "The history of individual rights in America is such that, whenever there is a crisis, the public is willing to listen to leaders who tell them that they need to trade freedom for security. And the public will buy it" (Rush 1). We have done this with the USA PATRIOT Act. It's time for America to be strong again, time for America to be "the home of the brave". After a tragedy you can either become scared or you can grow. For seven years we have been living like a scared nation, and it's time for that to change. We are being watched by the world, and we are not portraying ourselves as a good example of democracy. No more hiding behind our terrorism law that takes away our constitutional rights. Bernie Sanders, a critic of the USA PATRIOT Act and US Representative of Vermont states that "the right to read without government surveillance is a cornerstone of our democracy" (Wheeler 4). How else are we to expand our minds? Until we rid ourselves of the USA PATRIOT Act, better stay away from books such as the Do-It-Yourself Gunpowder Cookbook, The Revenge Encyclopedia, and the Do-It-Yourself Submachine Gun.

We should all thank the librarians who have been standing up for our rights. It's time we join them. The Amendments to our Constitution were demanded by those asked to join the union, while today, in the country that many fought and died for, we are giving them up. Yes, we need to find ways to protect our country, but not by giving up the freedoms of the people. If the FBI gets to listen to my phone calls and take my records, I want to be able to do the same to them. Take back your rights, and let's get rid of the USA PATRIOT Act.

Cramb, Peter. "Library ethics: Eight cylinder engine or rear windscreen wipers?" APLIS 7.4 (Dec. 1994): 226. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM. 24 Sep. 2008 http://libproxy.unm.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9701224039&loginpage=Login.asp&site=ehost-live.

"FACT SHEET:USA PATRIOT ACT PROVISIONS SET FOR REAUTHORIZATION." 5 Apr. 2005. USA Department of Justice. 27 Sept. 2008 http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2005/april/05_opa_163.htm.

G.M.E. "Librarians Divided over Patriot Act Compliance." American Libraries 34.3 (Mar. 2003): 18. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM. 24 Sep. 2008 http://libproxy.unm.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9253302&loginpage=Login.asp&site=ehost-live.

Oder, Norman. "Survey: Librarians Divided Over Post-9/11 Privacy Issues." Library Journal 128.3 (15 Feb. 2003): 16. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM. 24 Sep. 2008 http://libproxy.unm.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9075998&loginpage=Login.asp&site=ehost-live.

Rush, Paul. "PATRIOT Act Forges Unlikely Alliance." Insight on the News. 19.20 (16 Sep. 2003): 26-27 Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM. 28 Sep. 2008 .

USA PATRIOT Act. 27 Sep. 2008 http://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html

Wheeler, Maurice B. "The Politics of Access: Libraries and the Fight for Civil Liberties in Post-9/11 America." Radical History Review (Fall2005 2005): 79-95. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM. 24 Sep. 2008 .

.