U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., slammed parts of the USA Patriot Act and advocated a new national security bill to a receptive and enthusiastic audience at the Wisconsin Union Theater Sunday.
Feingold cast the lone Senate vote against the Patriot Act in 2001. UW-Madison Law School Professor Carin Clauss, who introduced Feingold, said the Patriot Act \gave the terrorists a bigger victory by responding in the way they might have wanted us to.""
Clauss praised Feingold's personal and political courage, at which point the senator walked onstage to cheers, whistles and the first of three standing ovations.
Feingold related the history of the Patriot Act, and said students were among the first to cite its flaws.
Ninety percent of the Patriot Act is reasonable, Feingold said, and initially there were many proposals which concerned him that did not make it into the bill. He said these initial changes made him hope he could vote with the majority.
""It was not my goal to vote against something called the USA Patriot Act four weeks after September 11. It was not a good time,"" Feingold said.
One part of the act with which Feingold disagrees includes allowing the government to access a person's business, health and library records without proving relevance to terrorism investigations. He also cited portions regarding searches without warrants and monitoring computer use.
""As I like to joke around, I took an unusual step for a senator,"" Feingold said. ""I actually read the bill. We don't have time to read all the bills. But this one needed to be read.""
Feingold noted his position has become more popular, adding that approximately 275 U.S. cities have passed resolutions denouncing the Patriot Act, including, ""touchingly,"" New York City's city council.
Much of the anti-Patriot Act energy is coming from the right, Feingold said. He spoke favorably about a proposed bipartisan bill called the Safe Act, which would give more input to judges and address criticisms of the Patriot Act. President Bush, he said, does not support the proposal.
""It's just very reasonable, what we're asking for on [the Safe Act], and that's why the president is nervous,"" Feingold said.
Brian Larson, a UW-Madison law and graduate student, said the speech was very specific and focused on politics, and said he expected it to address civil liberties more broadly. However, he said he felt Feingold's position made sense because he was concerned about how to ""actually make change.\
