madam speaker , i yield myself 4 minutes .  madam speaker , i rise today in support of the boucher-rohrabacher-mack motion to instruct the conferees to recede to the senate with respect to sunsetting in 4 years the libraries and book stores , roving wire taps and loan wolf provisions of the usa patriot act .  the most effective way for congress to maintain oversight of the most controversial powers that the patriot act conveys is to sunset those provisions within a reasonable period of time .  in past years , well before the december 2005 sunsets contained in the original patriot act , we asked the department of justice how it was using the authorities that had been granted to the department by the original act .  some questions simply went unanswered .  other questions were rebuffed , and we were told that the information was classified .  and still others were avoided by telling us that the information simply was not available .  all of that changed in april of this year when the department of justice realized that straight reauthorization of the patriot act would not happen without serious answers to our reasonable questions .  suddenly , numbers and examples were no longer unavailable .  suddenly , the information we had long been seeking was provided .  i have no doubt that if 16 provisions of the original act were not scheduled to sunset at the end of this year , we would still have little information on how these new authorities were being used .  if we have learned one thing over the last 4 years , it is that we will not get answers to our questions unless the justice department is compelled to come before us and justify its use of the more dangerous and intrusive powers that the law confers .  remember , sunsets do not in any way hinder law enforcement 's use of the powers the patriot act confers .  they merely ensure accountability and oversight , which are particularly important with respect to the three controversial provisions that are at issue today .  section 215 of the law puts personal records , including library , bookstore and medical records , up for grabs by law enforcement with no requirement that the person whose records are sought be suspected of involvement in a crime .  all law enforcement has to say is that the information is relevant to an investigation .  it could be an investigation of someone the person has never met and about whom the person has no knowledge .  moreover , an organization may not tell someone they have turned over his private information .  so people have no way of knowing when their privacy has been intruded upon .  earlier this year , the house , by a wide margin , voted to bar enforcement of this overly broad provision .  but the house bill reauthorizing the act with some changes perpetuates it for 10 years , and i think that that is inappropriate .  the senate bill sunsets this provision in 4 years .  our motion to instruct directs conferees to adopt the 4-year sunset provision .  section 206 , john doe roving wiretaps , allows law enforcement to obtain a single court order to tap any phone it believes a foreign agent would use , instead of getting separate orders for each phone .  moreover , the government is not required to name the target which allows wiretaps on phones of virtually anyone meeting the description of a john doe .  the combination of allowing blanket tapping of , for example , all of the pay phones in a target 's neighborhood or the phones of all of his friends and relatives , combined with the ability to wiretap a vaguely described john doe , means that roving john doe wiretaps require so little specificity that they can easily be abused .  sunsetting this provision in 4 years will allow congress to revisit how this authority is being used and whether it continues to be necessary .  reinstating is about accountability .  this motion to instruct would simply assure that we have the authority to carry it out .  madam speaker , i reserve the balance of my time .  