Congresswoman Bachmann supports the PATRIOT Act, supported the Protect America Act, and supports FISA legislation to allow the federal government to more easily effect surveillance on electronic devices. In 2007 Congresswoman Bachmann voted in favor of the Protect America Act, and in 2008 she asserted that the expiration of the Protect America Act placed American families into a perilous situation.
Although she was not in Congress when the PATRIOT Act was passed, Congresswoman Bachmann voted in 2011 to temporarily extend certain provisions of the PATRIOT act dealing with electronic surveillance and cell phones. Later that year, she argued for the extension of provisions dealing with the "lone wolf."
Star Tribune Op-Ed
In March of 2008, Congresswoman Bachmann wrote an op-ed in the Star Tribune discussing the expiration of the Protect America Act, and her belief that this expiration places the US in danger.
Michele Bachmann: Democratic leaders stand in the way of Americans' safety Article by: MICHELE BACHMANN Updated: March 14, 2008
Attack after attack has been averted because of the Protect America Act. It must be renewed.
For nearly one month, American intelligence has been crippled.
We are fighting terrorism with one eye shut and one hand tied behind our backs.
One of the critical tools that has allowed us to keep the homeland safe after 9/11 has been the Protect America Act. It updated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to deal with new, deadly challenges in this age of terror -- enabling intelligence services to immediately listen to phone calls made between foreign terrorists.
But on Feb. 16, the Protect America Act expired -- even though the Senate voted to reauthorize it with a strong, bipartisan vote, and even though the same bipartisan support exists in the House as well.
Why, then, has it expired?
Because the House Democratic leadership has simply refused to allow a vote -- knowing it will pass. In fact, 21 House Democrats wrote to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, urging her to bring the bill to the floor.
While this inaction may score cheap political points with the fringe elements of the Democratic caucus, American families are needlessly imperiled. This is not an exaggeration. This is not hyperbole. This is fact -- confirmed by our intelligence community and agreed upon by Republicans and Democrats alike.
The enemy that attacked our nation on Sept. 11, 2001, is part of a vast global network with terror cells stretching across the globe -- an enemy convinced that their ticket to heaven will be written in our blood.
Since 2001, attack after attack has been averted -- including a plot to destroy American-bound airliners with liquid explosives. Indeed, last year, the Heritage Foundation compiled a list of 19 confirmed terror plots against American targets that had been thwarted.
Those 19 thwarted attacks represent untold thousands of American lives saved; of families, communities and cities kept intact, and of a nation kept whole.
"Expiration of [the Protect America Act] would lead to the loss of important tools the intelligence community relies on to discover the plans of those who wish us harm," warned the director of national intelligence. Those warnings fell on Nancy Pelosi's deaf ears.
The No. 1 job of the American government is to protect her citizens. House Democratic leaders, in forcing the expiration of the FISA updates, have shirked that most fundamental responsibility -- the safety of the American people.
Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Temporary PATRIOT Act Extension
In February of 2011, Congresswoman Bachmann released a press statement noting her support for extending the PATRIOT Act provisions.
Bachmann Supports Temporary Extension of Patriot Act Provisions
Washington, Feb 8 - Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (MN-6), a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, released the following statement after today’s vote on the temporary extension of three legal authorities in the Patriot Act:
“Today’s vote was for a ten-month extension of three provisions that would have expired later this month. These provisions maintain the flexibility that our intelligence community needs to monitor terror suspects and protect our country against international terrorism. As a mother of five and a foster mother to 23 children, I voted for these authorities so that our laws keep pace with the evolving threats posed by terrorists.
“This vote was not for a full reauthorization of the Patriot Act. As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I look forward to briefings and reports from our intelligence community that will help us develop longer term solutions.”
Fox Business Appearance
Days after the vote to extend provisions of the PATRIOT Act, Congresswoman Bachmann appeared on Fox Business and discussed her vote in favor of those extensions.
Judge Napolitano: Congresswoman Bachmann, should the government be able to hack into our computer accounts without a search warrant?
Congresswoman Bachmann: Well, this is an issue ... Are you talking about the vote that we took this week that failed?
Judge Napolitano: Yes I am. I'm talking about the extension of the PATRIOT Act which permits federal agents to do that, even though you as a constitutional scholar know, as do I that the Constitution requires search warrants before agents can do that.
Congresswoman Bachmann: Yes, it does require warrants. There were two provisions from the current PATRIOT Act that we voted on. One is the roving wiretaps and that deals with the changing technology. Today, a lot of people that are alleged terrorists are using cell phones, they're using ipads, it isn't the traditional phone that's plugged into the wall anymore. So if a terrorist moves from their ipad to their cell phone, we want to be able to have that flexibility built in.
But, it's also important for people to remember that permission is given ahead of time to go after that particular individual. They may use a different cell phone, but it's the same individual. We have either the head of one of the intelligence networks, or the Director of the FBI, or the Deputy Director that has to sign off on that warrant.
Judge Napolitano: But not a federal judge as the constitution requires
Congresswoman Bachmann: Well, this is an area ... that's why we want to pay closer attention .... As you know, these provisions were set to expire on the 28th of February, so we're coming up against a wall now on whether or not we're gonna extend these provisions. Another provisions came out of another intel bill that was passed in 2004 that was also part of what we were voting on dealing with the lone wolf issue.
Judge Napolitano: Got it
Congresswoman Bachmann: The fact that we aren't fighting necessarily standing armies now, just lone actors that are potentially jihadi extremists
Fox News Appearance
On February 10, Congresswoman Bachmann appeared on Fox News and discussed her vote in favor of the extension and the TEA Party votes against the legislation. She states that she was willing to give a temporary extension to some PATRIOT Act provisions.
Gretchen Wilson: So why did you (vote against the PATRIOT Act Extension)
Congresswoman Bachmann: Well, I voted for the provision in the PATRIOT Act. There were members of the Congress that call themselves TEA party who did vote against the measure. I think that it wasn't explained real well to members. This wasn't actually a full reauthorization of the PATRIOT. This was three provisions that were temporarily reauthorized for nine months. I now sit on the Intelligence Committee and we're going to be discussing and looking into these areas a little more clearly over the next nine months to find out what we will permanently authorize.
PATRIOT Act Extension
In May of 2011, Congresswoman Bachmann spoke on the House floor about her vote to reauthorize certain provisions of the PATRIOT Act. She notes the portions of the law that she supports and why she supports them. (comments start at 4:45)
Mrs. BACHMANN. I thank the gentleman from Iowa for yielding.
This is a very important issue and a very important vote that we have just taken here in the House Chamber. It is dealing with the Patriot Act . We have had calls, we have had requests on our Facebook, Twitter, and in our emails urging a ``no'' vote tonight on the Patriot Act . I cast a ``yes'' vote on this act . The Patriot Act did pass. This is why. This is an authorization for the next several years in three areas. One is the lone wolf exception. We have a new war, a new enemy, new tactics. The lone wolf is one actor acting alone. And if we get a tip, it may be at the last minute, and we've got to go in for national security reasons and find that actor. That is an appropriate use of gaining this intelligence and information.
Number two, roving wiretaps. We have changed from the days of telephones being wired into the walls; now we use a cell phone. A lot of modern terrorists will buy a thousand ``go'' phones. They'll make one call, use a cell phone, throw it away like it's a disposable phone, pick up another cell phone, make another call. So we have to have the ability to be able to go to whichever phone a potential alleged terrorist may be using.
Now the third exception is the business records section; this is section 215. This is the section that most people have the greatest worries about. They worry about the infringement of Fourth Amendment rights. I worry about that too. I spent all week this week going to Members who I felt would oppose the Patriot Act . I went to people who are national voices who oppose the Patriot Act to find out what their concerns were, because I'm a lawyer. I genuinely am concerned about making sure that we never cross the line as a Federal Government.
Why? Because I think government is too big. I think we intervene too much in people's lives. I certainly don't want to give the government the unfettered right to go in and access my personal private records. This is what I know to be true about section 215 and why I could vote for it.
Number one, no right of gaining access to records can be given unless a Federal agent goes to a judge first. They have to go to the FISA court. Also, there has to be a connection to national security interests or to a foreign government. We've got that level of protection. When they go and make these requests, of which there have been 300-some requests, then they can go and they can gain access to a record.
Now, these are business records. These aren't records in my basement or your basement. These are records that a company has, like a phone company or a bank, but they're used in only the limited case where a judge first grants permission.
So what does that mean?
That means that it is constitutional in that the individual American's due process rights are observed because a Federal agent first has to go to a judge, a judge has to apply due process to that request, and then from there then access can be given to records, not in an individual's house but from a business. And then during the course of investigation--again, remembering, this is if there is a threat of a national security incident only.
Then during the course of an investigation, it's well understood if we're investigating a terrorist, if we get a lead that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has a phone, we get his information, we are able to access records that are somehow connected to an alleged terrorist--or now an admitted terrorist, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed--we have to be able to have the means. Do we tip off someone like a Khalid Sheikh Mohammed that we're looking at his records? Of course not. That would be absurd.
So, it's a very different time and a very different war and we're observing Fourth Amendment rights. Now, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is not an American. He is not an American citizen. He is not an American. But for Americans, when we are seeking a request for a record of an American, the Federal agent first has to go and get this approved by a judge.
I urge people, Mr. Speaker, go to my Facebook site. We have all of the documents up to verify and show all of the reasoning behind the Patriot Act .
And again, this is a very important discussion this evening. I want to thank my colleague Steve King for bringing this to people's attention. It's a very important vote. I've spent all week trying to get the basis for whether the vote should be ``yes'' or the vote should be ``no,'' and I have confidence this evening that it was the right vote to cast a ``yes'' vote.
And again, I encourage anyone who is interested to go to my Facebook site and get all of this documentation. Read for yourselves. Make up your mind. But in my opinion, this passes constitutional muster. And I can assure every American I would not vote for this bill unless I thought it did pass constitutional muster.
CNN National Security Debate
On November 22, 2011, Congresswoman Bachmann participated in the national security debate on CNN. She noted that the current war was different from previous wars and that new legislation was needed to address the new technologies.
BLITZER: Congresswoman Bachmann, let me bring you into this conversation. Are you with Congressman Paul or Speaker Gingrich or do you have your own view?
BACHMANN: Well, I'm with the American people, with the Constitution, and with the job of the commander-in-chief as the number one duty of the president of the United States.
We have to realize we're in a very different war, with very different techniques that are used for that war, and very different bad actors than we've had before in the terrorists and their motivations are very different.
We can't forget that technology is completely different. When we were looking at prior laws, phones were wired in to walls. That's not how it works any more. Today we deal with wireless functions. And we have to completely change the way that we go about investigating.
This is one thing we know about Barack Obama. He has essentially handed over our interrogation of terrorists to the ACLU. He has outsourced it to them. Our CIA has no ability to have any form of interrogation for terrorists.
When the bomber -- or the attempted bomber over Detroit, the underwear bomber was intercepted, he was given Miranda warnings within 45 minutes. He was not an American citizen. We don't give Miranda warnings to terrorists, and we don't read them their rights. They don't have any.
CBS Foreign Policy Debate
In Novemebr of 2011, Congresswoman Bachmann participated in the CBS foreign policy debate. She was asked about her support for waterboarding and responds that she does indeed support the tactic.
Major Garrett: Congressman-- congresswoman Bachmann, your opinion on this question that our emailer asked.
Michele Bachmann: If I were president, I would be willing to use waterboarding. I think it was very effective. It gained information for our country. And I-- and I also would like to say that today, under Barack Obama, he is allowing the A.C.L.U. to run the C.I.A. You need to understand that today-- today we-- it-- when we-- when we interdict a terrorist on the battlefield, we have no jail for them.
We have nowhere to take them. We have no C.I.A. interrogations anymore. It is as though we have decided we want to lose in the War on Terror under President Obama. That's not my strategy. My strategy will be that the United States will be victorious in the War on Terror.
Official Website Statements
Homeland Security
The United States has been blessed with a strong, dedicated military which can and will defend our nation’s security and preserve the freedoms we cherish each day. I believe in the mission of our men and women fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and support providing them with the necessary funding they need to achieve success overseas. Our commanders on the ground deserve praise as they have taken the fight to the enemy in both Afghanistan and Iraq and have prevented terrorists from striking us here at home. I support their efforts to combat terrorism, to ensure the safety of our country, and to further democracy in other parts of the world.
Last July, I was fortunate enough to meet with our soldiers and military officials in Iraq, Kuwait, Pakistan, Ireland and Germany. While in Germany, I was honored to visit American troops at Landstuhl Regional Medical Facility, the largest American military hospital outside the United States. In the brief time I spent with some of our brave men and women, it was clear to me that they not only understood the importance of their mission, but they were determined to complete it.
Leaving Iraq too soon would jeopardize our national security and give the terrorists a tremendous victory in the war on terror. However, I believe that the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) should continue moving forward with their contingency planning for a redeployment of U.S. Armed Forces from Iraq. Recently, I voted for H.R. 3087 which sheds light on the DoD’s standard operating procedure of contingency planning. This measure would not impose one specific exit strategy on our military commanders, but would encourage the President, in coordination with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and other senior military leaders, to develop and transmit to Congress a comprehensive strategy for the redeployment of our troops.
We have an obligation to future generations of Americans to ensure our country keeps terrorism off U.S. soil. I will continue to support efforts to strengthen our national defense and support our uniformed men and women who are committed to protecting America.
Voting Record
Arrest and Detention of US Citizens
In December of 2011, the House voted on the Defense appropriations act for 2012 - HR 1540. Part of that legislation was a provision to express the authorization of the military to arrest and indefinitely detain US citizens. The only requirement for this was that the person be suspected of allying with al-Qaida. The legislation passed 283-136. Michele Bachmann cast a "No Vote"
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2010
In October of 2010, the House voted on a funding bill for Homeland Security. Buried within that legislation was language to prevent any funds from being used to transfer detainees from Guantanamo Bay to the US or to their home nation. Also in that funding bill was a definition that made photos taken of prisoners at Guantanamo bay classified and unable to be released. The act passed the House 258-163. Michele Bachmann voted in favor of the act which prevented the movement of prisoners from Gitmo and classified photos of detainees.
Michele Bachmann voted in favor of the act which prevented the movement of prisoners from Gitmo and classified photos of detainees.
Protect America Act of 2007
The Protect America Act of 2007 was a bill that sought to allow electronic surveillance of people reasonable believed to be outside of the United States. The bill lists the requirements for initiating surveillance and gives it a 1 year limitation. The bill passed in the House in a 227-183 vote. Michele Bachmann voted in favor of the Protect America Act of 2007.
Michele Bachmann voted in favor of the Protect America Act of 2007.
Prohibits the President from releasing or transferring an individual currently detained at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the custody of the individual's country of origin or to a third country unless the President certifies to Congress that: (1) such country is not a designated state sponsor of terrorism; (2) such country's government can secure and exercise control over all of its territory; (3) no portion of such country's territory serves as a safe haven for terrorists or insurgent groups, particularly al Qaeda; and (4) there is no confirmed case of any individual who had been detained at Guantanamo who reengaged in terrorist activities subsequent to being transferred or released to such country.
Amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to redefine "electronic surveillance" as: (1) the installation or use of an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device for acquiring information by intentionally directing surveillance at a particular person believed to be in the United States when that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes; or (2) the intentional acquisition of the contents of any communication when that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes, if both the sender and all intended recipients are believed to be in the United States.
Amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to authorize the Attorney General (AG) and Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to jointly authorize, for periods up to one year, the targeting (electronic surveillance) of persons located outside the United States in order to acquire foreign intelligence information, under specified limitations and requirements. Authorizes the AG and DNI to direct an electronic communication service provider to: (1) immediately provide the government with all information, facilities, and assistance necessary to accomplish an acquisition of communications; and (2) maintain under security procedures any records concerning such acquisition.
