mr. chairman , i rise in opposition to this bill , the usa patriot and intelligence reform reauthorization act of 2005 , h.r. 3199 .  mr. chairman , after the tragic events of september 11 , every american knows , in every nuance of the truism , that freedom is not free .  i firmly believe that in order to have security in our homeland we must have a reasonable expectation of infringement of some of our civil liberties .  the stakes are too high to maintain a pre-9/11 mentality and the threats of terrorism are too real .  however , this bill crosses the reasonableness threshold by abrogating rights guaranteed under the constitution without a corresponding increase in the real tools law enforcement needs to fight the war on terrorism .  i believe that we should focus on securing our homeland , not by infringing on civil liberties as outlined in the patriot act -- but , by securing our rail and transit systems , by securing our ports and waterways systems , by securing our airspace , and by refining our intelligence organizations for maximum outcomes , just to name a few .  but i digress .  subsequent to passage of the usa patriot act , a hastily devised bill brought to the floor 45 days after 9/11 , i received many letters from my constituents who applauded my voting against its passage .  while they were opposed to the bill , many were comforted by the fact that the provisions would sunset and congress would take a closer look when clearer heads might prevail .  as the sunset date approached for the more troubling patriot act provisions , i received even more letters concerned about the prospect of extending or making permanent the more intrusive aspects of the usa patriot act .  i also received reports from people who believed that their rights had been unduly violated under the patriot act .  that is why i held a patriot act town hall earlier this ear to further examine the extent of the problem .  mr. speaker , let me give you an example reported to my office .  some months ago , a maryland-based engineer of iranian descent was at work when the state police showed up at his employer 's doorstep and started questioning him .  without explaining the reason for their interrogation , they asked him where he had gone to school , where he had lived , how many times he traveled internationally and whether he had ever rented a car .  then , they demanded that he hand over his laptop -- equipment that belonged to his employer -- and , after some haggling , they took the device without ever obtaining a warrant .  later , the engineer ( whom i 'll call `` mr. l '' ) was told that a former police officer had seen a group of people who `` looked middle eastern '' driving around an airport and `` acting suspicious. '' fortunately , mr. l had proof that he was nowhere near the airport during the time in question .  he has since been cleared of any wrongdoing .  yet , mr. l. remains convinced that his professional reputation has been seriously damaged , and in all likelihood , he is correct .  far too many americans of ethnic descent can relate to mr. l 's story of being accused of wrongdoing based only upon a racial or ethnic `` profile. '' although our u.s. constitution protects us against unreasonable searches and seizures , we know that this guarantee has not always been uniformly assured .  sadly , the governmental intrusion into mr. l 's life seems to be one of these cases .  it was an erosion of his personal freedom clearly allowed under the patrlot act , which as americans the rest of us take lightly at our peril .  mr. l 's story is not unique ; the danger his experience illustrates is not limited to islamic americans ; and the erosion of our freedom is not confined to investigations of terrorism .  mr. speaker , the expressed purpose of the patrlot act was to assure that u.s. law enforcement agencies would possess the legal tools that they said they needed to protect us from acts of terrorism .  from the time of its initial passage , however , there has been serious concern that the wider police powers granted to our law enforcement agents by the legislation -- as well as other assertions of executive power by the bush administration -- were not adequately balanced by sufficient constitutional safeguards .  the purposes of this bill are the same and it suffers from the same infirmities as its predecessor .  as the dissenting views to accompany h.r. 1399 reports , and i paraphrase , `` there are numerous provisions in both the expiring and other sections of the usa patriot act that have little to do with combating terrorism , that intrude on our privacy and civil liberties and that have been repeatedly abused and misused by both the justice department and the administration. '' these include , but are not limited to , the inadequate judicial oversight permitted by this bill and the roving wiretaps targeting innocent americans -- americans not involved in terrorism in any way .  further , the `` sneak and peak '' provisions authorize federal agents to enter our homes , search them and even seize our property , notifying us only after the fact .  it should come as no surprise that since 2002 , 389 communities and seven states representing over 62 million people have passed resolutions opposing parts of the usa-patrlot act .  it may come as a surprise however , that groups ranging the political spectrum from the aclu to gun owners of america are equally opposed to many sections of the bill .  they are concerned , like my constituents and many other citizens around the country , that the patrlot act has been used more than 150 times to secretly search an individual 's home , with nearly 90 percent of those cases having nothing to do with terrorism .  they are concerned that the patrlot act has been used to coerce an internet service provider to divulge information about e-mail activity and websurfing of its members .  they are concerned that it has been used on innumerable occasions to obtain reading records from libraries and bookstores -- and that on at least 200 occasions has been used to solicit reader information from libraries .  they are concerned that they may be next for these unreasonable intrusions .  yet we never had a discourse on these issues .  unfortunately , again the house process has been distorted to leave us to consider a one-sided partisan bill .  instead of thoughtfully considering the tough questions like : how much governmental power is truly required to protect us and what constitutional freedoms are we going to leave in place for our children and generations yet to be born , we consider a partisan bill of which the minority members inform they never received the facts necessary to fully evaluate .  for this and other reasons , i decided to cosponsor the bipartisan bill spearheaded by butch otter and bernie sanders , the security and freedom ensured act of 2005 , h.r. 1526 , the safe act .  among other corrections to the patriot act , this bill would require `` specific and articulable facts '' ( rather than a more generalized suspicion ) that a suspect is an agent of a foreign power when the government wishes to seize records .  it would require a far more detailed justification before `` roving wiretaps '' could be utilized and it would protect our library and bookstore records from unwarranted inspection .  in addition , h.r. 1526 would re-define the new crime of `` domestic terrorism '' in far more narrow terms , making it clear that our traditional freedom to assemble and challenge governmental action must not be chilled .  although this bill does not resolve every concern about the usa patriot act , i believe it represents a better beginning for the house debate than the bill under consideration .  democrats and republicans alike are seeking to better protect the freedom of americans -- without reducing our ability to protect ourselves against terrorist threats .  since september 11 , americans have learned to accept some additional intrusions into our privacy as the price that we must pay to protect ourselves .  yet , we must also remain vigilant .  mr. l. 's experience should be a lesson to us all .  as we defend freedom against foreign terrorism and promote freedom abroad , we must be ever-mindful not to destroy the freedoms that make us america .  