WASHINGTON — As lawmakers debated the renewal of the USA Patriot Act in recent months, critics of the terrorism-fighting law focused on potential abuses stemming from a section they dubbed the "library provision."
That section, which has been in effect, alarmed civil libertarians because it granted the government broad powers to obtain records about individuals in terrorism investigations -- even from libraries, bookstores and other places that might reveal personal habits.
But now, as Congress prepares to vote on extending key parts of the Patriot Act -- with what civil libertarians say are few substantive changes to protect the rights of ordinary citizens -- some critics of the act are asking whether they miscalculated.
Although focus has been on extending the act, the library provision has turned out to be rarely used by authorities. Instead, the tool of choice for federal agents has been a more obscure measure, a form of administrative subpoena known as a national security letter.
Unlike the library provision, national security letters have been used thousands of times, although that fact has until very recently been virtually lost amid the intense discussions on renewing the controversial law.
The kinds of information the government can obtain through national security letters includes requiring telephone companies, Internet service providers, banks, credit bureaus and other businesses to produce often comprehensive and detailed records about their customers or subscribers.
Some critics of the Patriot Act, which was first approved after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, wonder whether members of Congress and the Bush administration essentially manipulated the debate in part by selectively releasing data about the government's use of various sections of the law. They also wonder whether fuller disclosure could have aided the cause of critics and resonated more with the public.
"The focus on [the library provision] turned out to be a gift for the Justice Department," said Peter Swire, a law professor at Ohio State University and critic of the Patriot Act. "With so much attention focused over there, we never got the same political pressure to learn about the use of national security letters."
Critics of the act say this is because information about national security letters was under wraps until after the House and Senate had passed their bills, and because the government continues to maintain secrecy about their use.
