Why I oppose Proposition E

By Colin V. Gallagher

The following is an extended version of the ballot argument I submitted against Proposition E on the March 2 San Francisco ballot. The proposal would grant the Board of Supervisors authority to designate any federal statute as a "watch law" and disobey any federal court orders to produce records under the designated "watch law"

Proponents of Proposition E claim that its passage would result in greater privacy protection for city employees or patients at San Francisco General Hospital whose records may be requested under the PATRIOT Act. Don't believe it. Under this proposal, the entire Board of Supervisors, their aides, the City Attorney and the Mayor would all review any personal records withheld by the Board in defiance of a designated "watch law". That's hardly a meaningful protection of your privacy.

Moreover, this proposal is not just about the PATRIOT Act. If this measure passes, the Board could designate any federal criminal statute it didn't like a "watch act" and refuse to comply with its provisions. By way of example, the Board could stymie federal investigations into corruption in City Hall by designating RICO as a "watch law."

The PATRIOT Act was enacted by a bipartisan majority, and had won the support of Senators Lieberman, Edwards, Kerry and Feinstein, as well as Representative Gephardt. Records requests under the Act require the approval of a federal judge. The same requirements for surveillance of organized crime suspects under RICO apply to suspected terrorists under the PATRIOT Act. It is up to opponents of the PATRIOT Act to explain why Al-Queda or the IRA should have greater protection from government monitoring than the Mafia. Like the former Independent Counsel statute, the PATRIOT Act has a sunset provision and must be re-authorized. The Act is a necessary tool in the war on terrorism and should not be undermined.

If you don't like the PATRIOT Act, then don't vote for the people who voted for it. Or call your congressional representative and tell him or her not to re-authorize it next year. This is the wrong way to oppose it.