INTRODUCTION OF THE UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON AN OPEN SOCIETY WITH SECURITY ACT; Congressional Record Vol. 165, No. 145
(Extensions of Remarks - September 11, 2019)
Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1132]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
INTRODUCTION OF THE UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON AN OPEN SOCIETY WITH
SECURITY ACT
______
HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON
of the district of columbia
in the house of representatives
Wednesday, September 11, 2019
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, today, I reintroduce the United States
Commission on an Open Society with Security Act, expressing an idea I
began working on when the first signs of the closing of parts of our
open society appeared after the Oklahoma City bombing tragedy, well
before 9/11. This bill has grown more urgent as increasing varieties of
security throughout the country have proliferated without any thought
about their effect on common freedoms and ordinary access. The bill I
introduce today would begin a systematic investigation that takes full
account of the importance of maintaining our democratic traditions
while responding adequately to the real and substantial threats posed
by terrorism.
To be useful in accomplishing its difficult mission, the commission
would be composed not only of military and security experts, but for
the first time, they would be at the same table with experts from such
fields as business, architecture, technology, law, city planning, art,
engineering, philosophy, history, sociology and psychology. To date,
questions of security often have been left almost exclusively to
security and military experts. They are indispensable participants, but
these experts cannot alone resolve all the new and unprecedented issues
raised by terrorism in an open society. In order to strike the balance
required by our democratic traditions, a diverse group needs to be
working together at the same table.
For years now, before our eyes, parts of our open society have
gradually been closed down because of terrorism and fear of terrorism,
even when there are no alerts, without regard to their effects on
privacy or on an open society. Particularly following the unprecedented
9/11 terrorist attack on our country, Americans have a right to expect
additional and increased security adequate to protect citizens against
this new frightening threat. However, people expect government to be
committed and smart enough to undertake this awesome new responsibility
without depriving them of their personal liberty. These years in our
history will long be remembered by the rise of terrorism in the world
and in this country. As a result, American society faces new and
unprecedented challenges. We must provide ever-higher levels of
security for our people and public spaces while maintaining a free and
open democratic society. As yet, our country has no systematic process
or strategy for meeting these challenges.
When we have been faced with unprecedented and perplexing issues in
the past, we have had the good sense to investigate them deeply and to
move to resolve them. Examples include the National Commission on
Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9-11
Commission), the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the
United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (also known as the
Silberman Robb Commission) and the Kerner Commission following riots
that swept American cities in the 1960s.
The important difference in the commission proposed by this bill is
that it seeks to act before a crisis in basic freedoms gradually takes
hold and becomes entrenched. Because global terrorism is likely to be
long-lasting, we cannot afford to allow the proliferation of security
that most often requires no advance civilian oversight or analysis of
alternatives and repercussions on freedom and commerce.
With only existing tools and thinking, we have been left to muddle
through, using blunt 19th century approaches, such as crude blockades
and other denials of access, or risking the right to privacy using
applications of the latest technology with little attention to privacy.
The threat of terrorism to our democratic society is too serious to be
left to ad hoc problem-solving. Such approaches are often as inadequate
as they are menacing.
We can do better, but only if we recognize and then come to grips
with the complexities associated with maintaining a society of free and
open access in a world characterized by unprecedented terrorism. The
place to begin is with a high-level presidential commission of wise men
and women expert in a broad spectrum of disciplines who can help chart
the new course that will be required to protect both our people and our
precious democratic institutions and traditions.
____________________