Sheryl Gay Stolberg of the New York Times reports on Russell Feingold’s unique position in American politics:
Today, more than 40 Democrats and four Republicans stand with Mr. Feingold as he helps lead a filibuster blocking the act’s renewal. They are betting that the politics of terrorism have shifted from fear of another attack to wariness of “Big Brother” intrusions on personal privacy.
“If we stand up and say, as we are doing now, that we are absolutely committed to fighting terrorism, and that we are absolutely committed to the civil liberties of the American people, then that’s a winning position,” Mr. Feingold said in a recent interview. “For us to show weakness on civil liberties at this point would be another sign to people that the Democratic Party is not standing up for what it believes in.”
It’s not only the voters of today that will frown on a lack of commitment to civil liberties, the historians of tomorrow will condemn any weakness in standing up to the Bush administration’s assault on the fourth amendment.
In our short history we have seen several episodes where our leaders have trampled our rights, and, perhaps with the exception of Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus, all of those episodes were retrospectively judged to have been mistakes.
It started with our second President, John Adams, who signed the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798. Adams signed the laws ostensibly to protect the country against the French. In reality, the acts, which delayed citizenship for immigrants, gave Adams the power to imprison or deport aliens, and curtailed criticism of government, were aimed at consolidating power at Thomas Jefferson’s expense.
While Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus may have been justified, the post-war development of Jim Crow laws left one of the worst stains on the country’s history.
Woodrow Wilson has been severely criticized, and rightly so, for the excesses of the Espionage Act of 1917.
FDR has been correctly criticized for the detention of Japanese-Americans during World War Two, and Eisenhower’s reputation still suffers because of his tolerance of the red-baiting of Senator Joseph McCarthy.
The common denominator in these historical curtailments of civil liberties is that, in retrospect, the curtailments seemed unnecessary, hysterical, sometimes racist, and often had a hidden political purpose.
The same can be said about the current debate over the Patriot Act and the controversy over the NSA’s illegal surveillance program. These programs were enacted in a moment of hysteria, the debates over them (and the creation of the Homeland Security Department) have been used politically, their impact is felt most heavily by our Muslim and Arab citizens, and the most controversial of these programs are not necessary.
Senator Feingold has been the most level-headed politician in the country through all of this. He has shown wisdom, courage, and leadership. And every American, (Republican, Independent, or Democrat), should be grateful that Russ Feingold is in the U.S. Senate and working to protect our rights. When it comes time to pick a President in 2008, all Americans should consider these qualities of Russ Feingold and give serious consideration to supporting his campaign.