Concerns force delay in anti-terrorism bill

Calling the threat of additional terrorist strikes on U.S. soil a "clear and present danger," Attorney General Ashcroft urged Congress Monday to give federal law enforcement the tools it needs to catch and prosecute suspected attackers.

However, concerns on both sides of the aisle forced postponement of a markup that Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., tentatively had scheduled for today.

Sensenbrenner implied he was being pressured within his own Caucus to buck regular order, and warned the committee that next week is the absolute deadline.

"If this bill is put on a slow [track], we as a committee will lose our right to make improvements, and we will have a bill written by the bipartisan and bicameral leaderships and presented for an up-or-down vote," he said.

Monday's Judiciary hearing, hastily scheduled late Friday in the wake of the Bush administration's release of draft anti- terrorism legislation, was punctuated by irritated exchanges between Sensenbrenner and Judiciary ranking member John Conyers, D-Mich., who sparred over how to divide the time allotted for questioning.

Ashcroft was available to the committee for one hour, a portion of which was consumed by his opening remarks and those of panel leadership.

"Today, we seek ... new laws [to prosecute] American enemies, both foreign and domestic," Ashcroft said in strongly worded testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. "We cannot wait for the terrorists to strike.... we must prevent first and prosecute second."

Both Republicans and Democrats raised questions about the bill's impact on civil liberties and privacy. Democrats railed against provisions they said would allow the government to indefinitely jail illegal aliens--and Sensenbrenner agreed that a few more days' negotiations were in order.

Ashcroft presented the administration's anti-terrorism measures as balanced and long overdue. "This is not a wish list," he said.

Ashcroft said current law fails "to make terrorism a national priority" and noted that technology has dramatically outpaced surveillance statutes, which were crafted when rotary phones--not cell phones--were the norm.

"We're sending our troops into the modern field of battle with antiquated weapons," Ashcroft said. "We're not asking for the law to expand, just to grow as technology grows."

Under questioning by Rep. Howard Coble, R-N.C., Ashcroft noted that "computer crimes" that could be classified as terrorist activity under the bill include such things as disrupting air traffic control or meddling with computer systems, such as those that control the power grid, of vital national interest.

While Ashcroft conceded he could not guarantee whether such provisions would help prevent future terrorist attacks, "[they] can be the difference between life and death for Americans," he said.

In the Senate, Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said he was continuing to negotiate with the administration on the anti-terrorism measures.

"If we could find some areas where there really is an immediate problem--sure, we'll pass that," Leahy said. But he warned: "This is not a time to create whole new worries on people. A consensus, pared-down bill that takes care of the immediate problems is the best way to go."

Leahy said broader proposals to reorganize FBI and CIA functions were "not the thing to do here."