It was pointed out to me by the editors of the Spirit that there is a new local website based in Berkeley County called the West Virginia Conservative Review and their URL is www.wvconservativereview.org. Its stated goal is to hold elected officials accountable with regard to campaign promises. I was forwarded their press release which quotes its founder Davy Jones as saying “Too often elected officials say one thing while campaigning for election and then turn around and do the exact opposite once elected”. Adding, “Our goal is to link the legislative session to the campaign session to lift the veil of secrecy in Charleston”. The site has been up and running for about two months and apparently has over 800 users.

The most recent entry on the site takes Congressman Alex Mooney to task for his vote to extend the Patriot Act. This may have been what caught the eye of the Spirit. According to the post (dated May 14th), Mooney pledged “not to support any extension of the Patriot Act that included roving wiretaps….but….he did just that yesterday” - a reference to his vote on legislation - and it cites a survey that the Congressman filled out during his recent successful campaign. For the record Davy Jones was one of his opponents.

What I find ironic is that the same has been said regarding President Obama. According to an article that appeared on New York University’s website, “In 2005, then-Senator Obama spoke out against the PATRIOT Act on the Senate floor”. They quote him as saying, “This is legislation that puts our own Justice Department above the law. When national security letters are issued, they allow federal agents to conduct any search on any American, no matter how extensive, how wide ranging, without ever going before a judge to prove the search is necessary. … No judge will hear your plea; no jury will hear your case. This is plain wrong.”

The article continues, “Fast-forward six years. On May 26, 2011, Obama signed a two-year extension of the PATRIOT Act. This updated version tossed some of the civil liberty protections contained in the earlier version and in other drafts considered by Congress”. Wow.

The Patriot Act was originally passed in 2001 and signed into law by then President George W. Bush. Therefore it is ironic that Politifact quotes Obama as saying, “I take the Constitution very seriously. The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all. And that’s what I intend to reverse when I’m president of the United States of America.” He really said that.

Regarding the bill that just passed the House, US News and World Report published an article on May 18th with this headline, “Ex-CIA Leader Endorses Freedom Act and Mass Collection of Email Metadata”. The Ex-CIA leader it references is Michael Morell, twice acting director of the CIA and a member of President Barack Obama’s five-member surveillance review panel. According to the article, House member Justin Amash, R-Mich, voted against the bill because it “authorizes unconstitutional bulk data collection on law-abiding Americans.”

In the Senate, there are two Republicans from the same state - Kentucky - with diametrically opposing views on extending the Patriot Act. Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell agrees with President Obama - that the Patriot Act should be extended without revision through 2020. Imagine that. On the other side of the coin is Senator Rand Paul who has vowed to filibuster it.

According the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), there are three provisions of the Patriot that would expire on June 1st if congress fails to act to extend them, including the notorious section 215 - the one that authorizes the bulk collection of meta-data of US citizens. They state that “The White House [has] admitted that the government can accomplish its goals without bulk telephone records collection”. Further, “the President’s Review Board said ‘the information contributed to terrorist investigations by the use of section 215 telephony meta-data was not essential to preventing attacks.’ And the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board could not identify one time when bulk collection under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act ‘made a concrete difference in the outcome of a counterterrorism investigation.’ “

According to Wikipedia, Representative Jim Sensenbrenner, Republican of Wisconsin who introduced the Patriot Act in 2001, said that the National Security Agency overstepped its bounds.  He released a statement saying “While I believe the Patriot Act appropriately balanced national security concerns and civil rights, I have always worried about potential abuses.” He added: “Seizing phone records of millions of innocent people is excessive and un-American.”

According to EFF, “claims that collection of call records is not ‘that big’ of an invasion of privacy are simply untrue. As we point out in our amicus brief in Klayman v. Obama, ‘The call records collected by the government are not just metadata—they are intimate portraits of the lives of millions of Americans’.” 

Then there’s the oft debated quote from Benjamin Franklin, ”Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” In my humble opinion, if we have to compromise our constitutional freedoms in order to combat terrorism, perhaps the terrorists have achieved their objectives. For that, we all need to be held accountable. In that context, I wish WV Conservative Review - all the best.