SF Labor Council sheds light on Patriot I and II

San Francisco Labor Council sheds light on the Patriot Acts

As I rode in an airport shuttle in Los Angeles I found myself embroiled in conversation with the only other passenger, a yuppified Bush supporter, quite full of himself. I asked what he thought about the section of the Patriot Act which gives the Feds the ability to secretly monitor anyone’s reading habits in the public libraries, and makes it a criminal act for any library employee to tell you you’re being watched. “That’s not true,” he laughed, “you’re just paranoid.” “And you’re just ignorant,” I tossed back as I exited the vehicle.

Clearly this man only reads headlines because he, like millions of other Americans, was entirely clueless about the real laws that were put into effect via the Patriot Act, and even more ignorant about how many rights he’s about to lose if Patriot II ever gets to be a reality.

To remedy this problem among members of organized labor in San Francisco, the San Francisco Labor Council created a white paper on Patriot II. Approving a motion by Denis Mosgofian, SF Web Pressmen and Pre-press Workers Local #4N (which represents newspaper workers in the Bay Area) the council established a study group that parsed the Domestic Security Enhancement Act, or Patriot II. “We soon realized that this was draconian,” said Mosgofian, “coupled with the first Patriot Act and the RICO Act this would establish the architecture of a police state.”

Kristina Zinnen, Office Manager of the Council and delegate from the Office & Professional Employees Local 3, was also a

member of the group. “The goal was to educate union members to mobilize against the Patriot II. We’re asking union members to put pressure on their congressional representatives to repeal Patriot I and to block the Patriot II from ever being discussed in congress.”

According to the report, the Domestic Security Enhancement Act , AKA Patriot II, will:

• in unprecedented ways, expand law enforcement and intelligence gathering authority for repression of Americans;

• reduce or eliminate judicial oversight over government surveillance;
• authorize secret arrests and detentions;

• create a secret DNA database of individuals who are suspected of association with groups the government designates as “terrorist”;

• create new death penalty provisions; and

• empower the government to strip citizenship from Americans who belong to or support disfavored political or labor groups.

The expanded definition of “terrorism” is truly threatening. “The Patriot Act II has serious implications for labor. In one section it creates a new crime of ‘providing material support or resources’ for carrying out an act of ‘terrorism.’ However, because the definition of ‘providing material support or resources’ is so vague, it could be used to prosecute many actions legally available to labor unions as part of their efforts to protect their collective bargaining rights. After greatly expanding this definition, the Act provides enhanced penalties for ‘providing material support or resources.’ The effect is that employers would have enhanced tools to threaten, intimidate, and prevent labor unions from asserting their rights and protecting their members.” Contributions to charity would all become suspect. Even an organization like the United Way could be deemed to be “providing material support or resources” to terrorists if one of the causes under its umbrella were ever deemed to be threatening.

Far fetched? Think again. When the Three Strikes law was enacted, it was supposed to be used for the most violent members of our society. The first two convictions were for stealing a bicycle in one case, and a pizza in another. When Zero Tolerance was in vogue people were losing their yachts because traces of marijuana were found on them, and losing their cars for possession of one joint.

Last year the Pacific Maritime Association went to the negotiating table with the ILWU accompanied by armed guards. The ILWU walked at the threat. “That’s a real life example of what is happening.” Zinnen told me. “We can go to our membership and say, ‘we’re not being paranoid, this is already happening.’ And you have the Bush Administration calling to say it’s a matter of national security that you settle your contract and not go on strike. With this second legislation it’s going to get worse. Workers in the building trades for companies like Bechtel could be considered terrorists if they’re unhappy with their contract.”

I asked her what she thought was the reason so many Americans are so uninformed about the Patriot Act. “I think it’s because of the way it’s marketed. Everyone is still terrified. If you think of it as legislation that’s going to help prevent airplanes from flying into buildings, of course you want to support that. If this legislation really achieved that you’d want to support that. But that isn’t was it’s really doing. That’s what it’s pretending to do, but what it’s really doing is silencing dissent, it’s giving the government widespread powers of surveillance while at the same time they can operate in secret, and it particularly targets immigrants, which is of big concern to a lot of labor unions.

I think the government already has the power it needs to protect us. This legislation was drafted prior to the tragedy---it was just waiting for an excuse. It’s a way to get people to censor themselves because then they’ll be so afraid that what they’re doing---their acts of dissent, or their activism will be seen as terrorist.

Under this second legislation [actions] don’t even have to be deemed terrorist to have this other definition called ‘providing material support for terrorism’ applied.”

The San Francisco Labor Council isn’t alone in analyzing this issue. The ACLU has their own report on their website, http://www.aclu.org. as do numerous other organizations. The Friends Committee on National Legislation’s take can be found at: http://www.fcnl.org

The entire proposal can be seen at:

http://www.eff.org/Censorship/Terrorism_militias/patriot2draft.html

The word is getting out through grass roots movement and the internet. Mosgofian recently returned from a convention on
the east coast where he distributed the San Francisco report to other members of his own union. “We passed it out to our delegates who took it back to their members. It’s being spread around the country through union networking. We handed it out in Boston to our Canadian brethren---we understand they’re considering similar legislation there.”

The Council would like to get the word out to college campuses as well, but for the moment, “We’re mostly working locally.”

Zinnen told me. “We have to reach out to other labor councils and to our union memberships. We’re going to send a letter to all of our affiliated unions asking them to invite a speaker to address the membership of the individual unions. We’re starting locally---it would be great if it were to be picked up nationally. “



San Francisco Labor Council, AFL-CIO Special Report

PATRIOT ACT II – COMPLETING THE ARCHITECTURE FOR A POLICE STATE?


WHAT IS THE PATRIOT ACT II?

The Patriot Act II is a draft of proposed legislation leaked to the public this past February 2003. It’s official name is the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003.

If enacted, it would:

• in unprecedented ways, expand law enforcement and intelligence gathering authority for repression of Americans;

• reduce or eliminate judicial oversight over government surveillance;

• authorize secret arrests and detentions;

• create a secret DNA database of individuals who are suspected of association with groups the government

designates as “terrorist”;

• create new death penalty provisions; and

• empower the government to strip citizenship from Americans who belong to or support disfavored political or labor groups.

WHY SHOULD UNIONS BE CONCERNED?

The Patriot Act II works in conjunction with the expanded law enforcement powers established by the first Patriot Act. Patriot I created the new category of "domestic terrorism." When examining the measures that Patriot Act II would authorize against "suspected terrorists," it's important to note that the legal definition of domestic terrorism is now so broad that it encompasses traditional forms of job actions and concerted activities by unions, such as non violent picket lines, civil disobedience or strikes. Resistance to corporate and government domination becomes “terrorism.’

BACKGROUND TO THE PATRIOT ACT II

The Bush Administration is one of the most anti-labor presidencies in the history of this country. The Administration has:

1) issued a directive to federal agencies to privatize 850,00 jobs,

2) stripped union rights from 170,000 workers who were transferred to the newly created Homeland Security Department, a trend that continues with the latest Transportation Security Administration order that prevents airport screeners from organizing,

3) effectively barred project labor agreements on federally funded construction projects,

4) threatened the ILWU through the Office of Homeland Security during recent contract negotiations with the Pacific Maritime Association -- Tom Ridge told union leaders that a strike or slow down would be a threat to “national security” and indicated the possible use of troops to keep the port open,

5) seeks to pack the Circuit Courts with anti-labor judges such as Priscilla Owens, and 6) appointed a Labor Secretary that acts more like a Secretary of Commerce.


WHAT WILL THE PATRIOT ACT II DO AND HOW IT CAN BE USED AGAINST ORGANIZED LABOR?

I. Patriot Act II Undermines Fundamental Constitutional Rights Of Americans By Creating Extremely Broad Definitions Of “Terrorism”

The Patriot Act II has serious implications for labor. In one section it creates a new crime of "providing material support or resources" for carrying out an act of “terrorism.” However, because the definition of "providing material support or resources" is so vague, it could be used to prosecute many actions legally available to labor unions as part of their efforts to protect their collective bargaining rights. After greatly expanding this definition, the Act provides enhanced penalties for "providing material support or resources." The effect is that employers would have enhanced tools to threaten, intimidate, and prevent labor unions from asserting their rights and protect their members.

The Patriot Act at 18 U.S.C. § 2331 (5) defines "domestic terrorism" as including acts that "appear" to be intended to influence the policy of a government "by intimidation or coercion." This language is dangerously vague and can be used to apply to labor union actions such as strikes, slowdowns, boycotts informational picketing, organizing, or even engaging in aggressive collective bargaining. Patriot II amends the Patriot I Act by making it a crime to provide "material support or resources" or to disguise the source or location of such resources to be used in carrying out an act of international or domestic “terrorism.” Any federal prosecutor could decide that a labor union is engaging in these acts in an attempt to "coerce" government policy.

During the ILWU collective bargaining in 2002, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld all but made this very accusation of “terrorism” by stating that an ILWU strike would not be in the interest of "national security." Further, under this definition, labor organizers could be convicted of domestic terrorism even if they don’t have the intent of being intimidating or coercive.

The definition states they can be convicted even if it only "appears" that they fit into this loose description. Appears to whom?

Patriot II defines "material support or resources" as including currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, lodging, expert advice or assistance, communications equipment, facilities, personnel, transportation, and other physical assets. In other words, if a labor organizer provides any of this type of support for job actions or other legal activities that a

federal prosecutor deems to be "intimidating or coercive," they could be charged and convicted under the new law. This means that an action itself is not “terrorist,” but the individual who carries it out is -- as designated by government officials. In other words, a “terrorist” act is defined as an act against what the government defines as government policy or government interest. The same acts done in another context are not “terrorist.”


II. Patriot Act II Undermines Civil Liberties By Creating Draconian Sentencing For So-Called “Terrorist” Activities


• Shifts the burden of proof from the government to defendants to obtain bail for various crimes labeled as “terrorist,” including providing "material support or resources" for “terrorism.” For almost all other criminal allegations, the accused is entitled to bail unless the government can prove at a hearing that the accused is a flight risk.


• Increases to 10 years the minimum period for parole for persons convicted of offenses that are nonviolent, including providing "material support or resources" for “terrorism”. Most serious felonies require parole of no more than five years. Lifetime parole could be required for offenses that do not even involve serious injury or death.

Removes statute of limitation for offenses labeled “terrorist” that are nonviolent, including providing "material support or resources" for “terrorism”. Prosecutors can go after unions, and even individual officers or members, for nonviolent acts that took place several years previously.



• Extends death penalty for “terrorist” acts, including providing "material support or resources" for “terrorism”, that result in death, even where the person providing the support did not cause the death. Under this act, if labor unions are picketing and police use force to intervene resulting in death, the prosecutor could charge the picketers under this law, even though the police actions caused the death.

AN EXAMPLE OF HOW THE PATRIOT ACT I AND II COULD BE USED AGAINST LABOR

The recent anti-war demonstrations at the Port Oakland were met with excessive force by the police. Protestors and ILWU Local 10 members standing nearby were shot in the face, neck and body with wooden dowel bullets and concussion grenades. If someone had died in this melee, the anti-war organizations could have been labeled as “terrorist” for causing the death. If law enforcement agencies suspected that the union cooperated or were involved in any capacity with these organizations, they too could be labeled “terrorist,” subjecting the leadership and members to surveillance, arrest, and seizure of union assets.

• Denies federal benefits to persons convicted of “terrorist” offenses, including providing "material support or resources" for “terrorism.” Thus, some labor activists could lose their pensions, unemployment benefits, and veterans benefits because they attended a rally that a federal prosecutor deemed to be "intimidating."

• Links Patriot Act II to RICO. RICO is a statute designed to go after organized crime with very severe penalties and fines. When used against a labor activist, RICO would prohibit a union from providing an attorney or funds to support legal defense of that member. Even if found innocent, the member cannot recoup legal costs from the union. Under Patriot II, labor activists engaging in or providing support for legal job actions can also be prosecuted under the organized crime laws if they are deemed “terrorist” by the government.


• Allows the seizure of property of persons convicted of committing “terrorist” acts, including providing "material support or resources" for “terrorism.” Prosecutors could seize the house, car, pension, etc. of a labor organizer or seize the union hall, bank account, or pension fund of a union, if convicted of even “material support . . .”


• Permits extradition of ANY American to all foreign countries including those without Senate-approved extradition treaties. Treaties provide specific conditions for prosecution, ensuring a fair trial and protecting against unjust laws. Under this legislation, an American can be sent abroad to face trial before courts of a foreign dictatorship, and an American judge would have no ability under the statute to even inquire as to the fairness of that country's court system or the reasons behind its criminal accusations. This section expressly prohibits a judge from considering any of the following: "humanitarian concerns," "the nature of the judicial system of the requesting foreign government," and "whether the foreign government is seeking extradition of a person for the purpose of prosecuting or punishing the person because of race, nationality or political opinions of that person." International organizing and solidarity efforts will be severely weakened. For example, a US labor organizer on a delegation investigating human rights abuses in factories in China could be accused of working with a "terrorist" labor organization and extradited. Or, a US union member fund raising on behalf of foreign liberation organizations, such as the FMLN in El Salvador, or Nelson Mandela’s ANC in South Africa, could be extradited to those countries.


III. Patriot Act II Unfairly Targets Immigrants Under The Pretext Of Fighting “Terrorism”

Given the high concentration of immigrant workers in many sectors of organized labor, the targeting of immigrants via the Patriot Act II should be of grave concern to the union movement. The provisions of this Act would make vulnerable immigrant workers who attempt to organize or who are in leadership positions in unionized work-sites.

• Undercuts trust between police departments and immigrant communities by opening sensitive visa files to local police for the enforcement of complex immigration laws.


• Targets undocumented workers with extended jail terms for common immigration offenses.


• Provides for summary deportations without evidence of crime, criminal intent or “terrorism,” even of lawful permanent residents, whom the Attorney General says are a “threat to national security.”

• Completely abolishes fair hearings for lawful permanent residents convicted of even minor criminal offenses through a retroactive "expedited removal" procedure, and prevents all courts from questioning the government's unlawful actions by explicitly exempting these cases from habeas corpus review. Congress has not exempted any person from habeas corpus a protection guaranteed by the Constitution since the Civil War.



• Allows the Attorney General to deport an immigrant to any country in the world, even if there is no effective government in such a country.


• Authorizes secret arrests in immigration and other cases, such as material witness warrants, where the detained person is not criminally charged.


IV. Patriot Act II Diminishes Corporate Accountability Under The Pretext Of Fighting “Terrorism”

• Grants immunity to businesses that provide information on customers or employees in “terrorism” investigations, even if their actions are taken without regard to privacy or show reckless disregard for the truth. Workers attempting to organize or leaders in unionized worksites could be "turned in" by companies, subjecting them to arrest, government harassment, stigmatization by co workers and their communities, etc.

• Threatens public health by severely restricting access to crucial information about environmental health risks posed by facilities that use dangerous chemicals. The Act would deprive communities, labor, and environmental organizations of critical information concerning risks to the community contained in “worst case scenarios” prepared under federal environmental laws. Under section 112(r) the Clean Air Act, 47 U.S.C. § 7212(r), corporations that use potentially dangerous chemicals must prepare an analysis of consequences of the release of such chemicals to surrounding communities. This information is absolutely critical for organizations seeking to protect public health and safety, and the
environment, and by ensuring compliance by private corporations with environmental and health standards and alerting local residents to the hazards to which they may be exposed.

The proposed amendment limits access to such information to reading rooms in which copies could not be made and notes could not be taken, and censors from the reports such basic information as “the identity or location of any facility or any information from which the identity or location of the facility could be deduced.”?“Official users” are given greater access, but these users only include government officials. Government whistleblowers who reveal any information restricted under this section commit a criminal offense, even if their motivation was to protect the public from corporate wrongdoing or government neglect.


V. Patriot Act II Diminishes Personal Privacy by Removing Checks on Government Power

• Permits searches wiretap, and surveillance of US citizens on behalf of foreign governments including dictatorships and human rights abusers. Such spying, or the threat of such spying, would weaken international solidarity efforts critical for effective bargaining and global organizing. Foreign governments could obtain information on labor organizers from their own countries by spying on US unions working with those organizers. In countries such as Colombia, this could mean death. US labor members could also be accused of “terrorist” crimes if they work with foreign organizations deemed to be “terrorist.”


• Allows for the sampling and cataloging of innocent American's genetic DNA information without court order and without consent. Government could share information regarding genetic predisposition to diseases of labor activists to employers, giving a means to blacklist workers and union organizers. Genetic discrimination is widespread among employers, and is perfectly legal in most states.


• Permits, without any connection to anti “terrorism” efforts, sensitive personal information, such as consumer credit information, medical records, educational records, to be shared with local and state law enforcement. Personal information could be used to smear labor leaders or create profiles based on personal issues that could be shared with business.

• Makes it easier for the government to initiate surveillance and wiretapping of U.S. citizens under the authority of the shadowy, top secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

• Permits the government, under certain circumstances, to bypass the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court altogether and conduct warrantless wiretaps and searches.


• Creates a new category of "domestic security surveillance" that permits electronic eavesdropping of entirely domestic activity under looser standards than are provided for ordinary criminal surveillance under Title III.


VI. Patriot II Removes Checks and Balances Between Judicial and Executive Branch

The Act would abolish all court supervised consent decrees prohibiting state and local law enforcement from illegal spying.

When Senator Feingold asked Attorney General Ashcroft repeatedly whether actual investigations had been hampered by these safeguards, he could not cite any examples. In the name of intelligence gathering, police departments in many cities spied on innocent members of the public who were active in churches, community groups, and political organizations.

Federal courts, responding to civil lawsuits urging an end to such spying, issued decrees prohibiting spying absent probable cause of illegal activity. The San Francisco Police Department is under a consent decree after being found guilty in the early 1990's of maintaining massive illegal files on Bay Area activists and organizations. Local police could create files on labor
organizations targeting members who are leaders in important union campaigns or activists in other non labor organizations.

The Act would shelter from prosecution any federal agents engaged in illegal surveillance without a court order from criminal prosecution if they are following orders of high Executive Branch officials. The criminals of Watergate and the Iran-Contra Scandal would never have been prosecuted if this Act were in effect.

CONCLUSION

The proposed Patriot Act II, coupled with the Patriot Act I and RICO, creates the legal architecture for a police state in the United States. The purpose of this legislation is to allow for US global expansion unhindered by organized domestic opposition. These laws and proposed legislation are clearly intended to prevent resistance to US corporate control and allow preemptive attacks on those organizations and individuals the government considers a threat.

We believe the context for this legislation is the various US authored global trade agreements which have put US-based corporations in control of much of the world’s natural, intellectual and labor resources. America is becoming the base of global corporate power managing much of the planet. The federal government is attacking the wages of American workers and trying to de-unionize huge sections of our work force. As American labor loses employment to cheaper labor elsewhere, America’s working families are left to themselves to scramble and struggle for security amidst a declining educational, healthcare, and physical public infrastructure robbed of taxes diverted to global and domestic military operations.

In virtually every nation of the world, resistance to the effects of the globalization of capital has evolved into broad social movements that are linked together. Opposition to the privatization of public property and services is a central part of this resistance. The recent US war on Iraq saw the rapid growth of a global anti-war, anti-US empire movements with real solidarity between Americans and people in other nations; within labor, and between labor and other groups.

We believe Patriot Act and the proposed Patriot II are designed to suppress this collective resistance. Labor needs to act now to defeat Patriot II and to repeal Patriot I in its own interest and in the interest of the American people.


A major resource for the analysis of Patriot Act II utilized in this report is from the ACLU’s Interested Persons Memo:

Section-by-Section Analysis of Justice Department draft “Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003,” also known as

“PATRIOT Act II” (2/14/03) http://www.aclu.org