New FISA measure reduces our liberty

Regarding the new FISA bill crafted by Rep. Steny Hoyer, I am disturbed there will be no effective curb on surveillance of American citizens.

Congress gives a green light to the executive branch to spy on American citizens. Illegal activities are condoned for the specious reason of "national security." I do not feel safer if any government or government agency has carte blanche to spy on me. The Fourth Amendment is effectively abolished.

Nor do I feel that granting immunity in the past, present or future is wise. Do I get similar immunity for breaking the law? If simply being big and powerful makes it all right to break the law for the purposes of aiding the present government, do we now have a two-tiered system of law?

So, now, if you are rich enough or powerful enough, you can break the law with impunity in perpetuity.

This "compromise" just validates a de facto situation into a de jure truth, doesn't it? Raise the specter of a terrorist threat, and our laws will bend or break.

Benjamin Franklin said those who seek to protect liberty by giving up some of it for security deserve neither. We are not safer by giving up any of our essential liberties.

The FISA bill currently before the Senate is so imperfect that it should not and must not be passed into law.

I support Sen. Feingold's proposed filibuster of this bill.

Sen. Obama has made a very political decision by not opposing this capitulation. Is this the "new politics?" It looks very old to me.

Herb Best

Streamwood