By Pamela Gorman
I heard a person say something that made me stop in my tracks the other day, and it should cause us all to stop and consider how far we have come as a free nation. He said, “I’m not a black helicopter nut, but I am a little afraid of my government now.” I’ll admit. I was eavesdropping. I didn’t mean to, but the noise level at Starbucks suddenly dropped and his voice sort of boomed in the sudden quiet of the coffee shop where I was working on my computer while sipping my favorite latte concoction (double tall, sugar-free vanilla, extra hot, breve latte, for those keeping score). Since I couldn’t turn and ask him to explain in the strict rules of polite society, I instead decided to opine here on why he would fear the government.
There is a strange thing that happens to people in the policy making arena when they are faced with horrid and inhuman behavior of a few… they spring to action making new laws to restrict the freedoms of the many. It is what drives self-proclaimed conservatives to argue for things like allowing the state police to capture video and photographs of every driver they pass (and store that information along with the location and time of the recording indefinitely). It is what causes otherwise logical thinkers to try and take guns away from law-abiding citizens in hopes that the criminals will follow suit and stop using guns for crimes, too. And, outraged by 9/11, it was what led to the Patriot Act’s acceptance by a large majority in our U.S. Congress.
The problem is, the criminals always find a way around the new laws – leaving the good guys with further government encroachment into their privacy and the government with seemingly endless powers over the “free” people in the country.
Law enforcement is a proper function of government, in my mind. The constitution says the government will protect us from our enemies, both foreign and domestic, after all. That function should be, and is normally, a 3rd party objective execution of the laws as determined by a representative body of the people. But what happens when it isn’t? What happens when a bad apple gets into power and is able to exercise law enforcement procedures in such a way that their personal enemies are harassed and stalked? That is the rub, as they say.
Throughout history, there have been multiples of bad apples around the world. The constitutional protections we enjoy in America have largely protected our citizens from the antics of a crazed leader who might target his political enemies with the powers of the state. But, that protection is greatly diminished a little at a time by well-meaning policies that grant sweeping powers to the government over the many in order to protect us from the few. I am concerned that some of the provisions in the Patriot Act have opened up Pandora’s box in terms of sacrificing our constitutional rights to privacy for a false sense of security we might gain from knowing our government is “watching” to see trouble before it starts.
There is a delicate balance that must be struck between protecting the rights of the innocent and preventing terrorist activity and the like. When lawmakers respond in fear to a current event, I see that scale tipping as our liberty gets lighter and lighter and the government intrusion gets heavier and heavier.
I once got into a debate with another lawmaker over the issue of “big brother” preventative tools for law enforcement. She sniped at me, “Well if you aren’t doing anything wrong, then you shouldn’t care.” I fully understand her point. But, the hole in her logic is that the government who watches, records, and documents is the same one that determines (according to passing political fancy) how “doing something wrong” is defined. In current times and throughout history, other governments have defined it as speaking your mind or practicing your religion. Well, you might say, the constitution protects your right to free speech and freedom of religion. Right. And it used to protect your right to privacy. Think about it.
Pamela Gorman is running for the United States House of Representatives District 3.
