mr. speaker , i thank the gentleman for yielding me this time . 
mr. speaker , if this rule is adopted , the house of representatives will consider the extension of the usa patriot act . 
the ultimate fate of this legislation will determine how effective we will be in investigating the clandestine activities of terrorist organizations and in preventing catastrophic events in the future . 
there is , mr. speaker , no greater or more solemn responsibility that we have as representatives of the american people . 
and , frankly , i have been astonished at the characterization of the bill and the record of the justice department . 
as a member of the committee and the subcommittee of jurisdiction , the subcommittee on crime of the committee on the judiciary , i have spent countless hours going over the records , including looking at top secret reports that are lodged with this congress , and i will state for the record i can find no evidence of a violation of civil liberties . 
and i would suggest any member who comes to the floor be very careful about suggesting that there are , without evidence . 
that is a criticism of our department of justice , that is a criticism of our investigative agencies and our intelligence agencies that is not borne out by the record . 
i think we should make that very clear , particularly today when we have another instance , presumably , in london , of what we are facing . 
this is serious business , and allegations that are easily thrust in this body , in my judgment , are irresponsible . 
i authored the amendment in the committee on the judiciary to require two sunsets of the two most controversial provisions in this bill , but i did not do that based on any suggestion there is any record of a violation of civil liberties . 
i did that because , it seems to me , it was an indication to the public from us that we would consider doing effective oversight , which we have done . 
some have suggested in 1-minutes this morning that there is something wrong with the process here . 
i do not understand that . 
now , i have been absent for 16 years , but i can recall how things were done 20 years ago . 
in the committee on the judiciary , with respect to this bill , the bill was available on a friday . 
we marked it up on a wednesday . 
i can recall being a member of that committee when i was in the minority when we received the bill on the midnight before we were supposed to consider things . 
this is hardly a wrong or improper process . 
mr. speaker , we considered over 50 amendments in the committee on the judiciary . 
we on the majority side were willing to stay there for several more days . 
it was the minority who made the motion to call the previous question and withdrew consideration of more amendments on their side . 
this is a structured bill that has something on the order of 20 amendments available , covering many of the issues that people are concerned about . 
i would hardly suggest that we are moving with undue dispatch here or that somehow we are not considering this in proper order . 
