Patriot Act provisions expire as Senate compromise comes late

Tom Vanden Brook | USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — The Senate on Sunday let key sections of the Patriot Act law expire at midnight, but voted to advance a bill that would eventually replace its most controversial provision.

The drama on the Senate floor over the anti-terrorism law, passed in the wake of 9/11, highlighted sharp divisions within the GOP over privacy concerns and national security and carried immediate implications for government surveillance programs.

The Senate voted 77-17 to advance a bill that would end the National Security Agency's controversial bulk collection of the phone data of millions of Americans not suspected of any terrorist activity.

But final passage of the USA Freedom Act will not come until later this week, meaning that three sections of the Patriot Act will expire before senators can take further action.

"Tonight begins the end of bulk collection," said Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. "The bill will ultimately pass."

But Paul, a presidential candidate, would not consent to an expedited final vote on the USA Freedom Act on Sunday. Paul believes the expiring Patriot Act sections violate Americans' privacy rights. He said federal agents could still seek a warrant to monitor suspected terrorists even without the Patriot Act powers.

"This is a debate over the Bill of Rights," said Paul, who had the support of about 30 young people wearing "Stand with Rand" T-shirts in the Senate visitors' gallery. "This is a debate over your right to be left alone."

Sen. Dan Coats, R-Ind., said it was risky to let the Patriot Act provisions expire, even for a few days.

"To go dark on this is a risk of Americans' lives," Coats said.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said late Sunday that the Senate needed to ensure that "this irresponsible lapse in authorities is as short-lived as possible."

"On a matter as critical as our national security, individual Senators must put aside their partisan motivations and act swiftly," he said in a statement.

Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., blamed Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., for running out the clock on the law in an effort to persuade senators to extend the law without making any changes to end controversial surveillance programs.

That approach backfired, as Democrats and libertarian-leaning Republicans concerned about privacy rights balked at renewing the law as it is for another five years. They wanted to pass the USA Freedom Act instead.

"We're in the mess we are today because of the majority leader," Reid said Sunday. "The majority leader should have seen it coming. Everybody else did."

McConnell and other security hawks in the Senate argued that Congress should not weaken any of the government's surveillance powers at a time when the USA is being threatened by the Islamic State and other terrorist groups. McConnell said Sunday that there was a "misinformation campaign" against the NSA's bulk collection of phone data, emphasizing that the government is not listening in on Americans' phone conversations.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, urged the Senate to pass the USA Freedom Act, which would rewrite Section 215 of the Patriot Act to end the NSA's mass collection of the phone records of millions of Americans not suspected of any crime. The data includes who makes and receives calls, when they occur, and how long they last.

The House passed the bipartisan USA Freedom Act on May 13 by a vote of 338-88. President Obama has promised to sign it into law if it is approved by the Senate.

"Al Qaeda, ISIL and other terrorists around the globe continue to plot attacks on America and our allies," Boehner said in a statement just before the Senate session Sunday. "Anyone who is satisfied with letting this critical intelligence capability go dark isn't taking the terrorist threat seriously. I'd urge the Senate to pass the bipartisan USA Freedom Act, and do so expeditiously."

The NSA phone surveillance program was made public in 2013 by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, who has been charged by U.S. authorities with violations of the Espionage Act and is living in Russia.



In addition to Section 215, the expiring Patriot Act sections include a "lone wolf" provision that allows U.S. authorities to target surveillance at suspected terrorists who are acting alone without any direct ties to terrorist groups or rogue nations.

A "roving wiretap" section also is expiring. The provision allows federal agencies to monitor a suspected terrorist rather than a specific phone or electronic device. Criminals often use and throw away multiple pre-paid, disposable cell phones known as "burners."

Senate leaders convened the Sunday session after failing to reach agreement on the issue before their weeklong Memorial Day recess.

Senators on May 23 failed to reach the 60-vote supermajority needed to advance bills to renew the Patriot Act without changes through 2020 or to advance the USA Patriot Act. They also balked at agreeing to any short, temporary extensions of the law that would have given Senate leaders more time to reach a compromise.

A three-judge federal appeals court ruled in May that the NSA's bulk collection of phone data is illegal and is not what Congress intended when it passed the Patriot Act after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Before Sunday's Senate session, CIA Director John Brennan said on CBS' Face the Nation that "political grandstanding" over reauthorizing key parts of the Patriot Act was threatening national security.

Brennan said the United States faces a level of threats from the Islamic State and other groups that compares with the period leading up to the 9/11 terror attacks. The intelligence community needs "tools" like the NSA's phone-data collection program to understand the tactical moves of terror groups, he said.

"There has been a full-court effort to try to keep this country safe," Brennan said.

However, Richard Clarke, a former White House counterterrorism official, said on ABC's This Week that the authority for the phone data collection is not used often and that the FBI can go to the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court and seek an order to get the records.

"It probably is not as big a deal as the president is making out," Clarke said.

Contributing: Tom Vanden Brook