"We're all concerned about national security, there is no doubt. But at what cost?" said Goow, whose city is home to thousands of Muslims and Arab Americans. "It wasn't just to protect Arab Americans. It was to protect all Americans."
Paterson is one of nearly 390 communities and seven states to adopt resolutions in recent years urging federal lawmakers to curb sweeping new powers in the USA Patriot Act, the anti-terrorism legislation Congress passed after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001.
Ironing out differences
With 16 key provisions set to expire by year's end, lawmakers began negotiating Thursday to iron out major differences between House and Senate versions of bills to renew the act.
Some Arab-American groups worry that the government has used the Patriot Act to engage in a "fishing expedition," targeting Muslims and people from Arab and Southeast Asian countries. The terrorist attacks were blamed on al-Qaida, the Islamic extremist group led by Osama bin Laden.
"If this law was intended to make America secure, I'm still waiting to see the result...Things have not changed for us," said Sohail Mohammed, a lawyer in Clifton, N.J. who represented many Muslims detained in the FBI sweeps. "This act was basically done at the expense of civil liberties."
While Republicans and Democrats agree the law has been effective in some ways - namely improving information sharing between federal agencies - they differ on whether the powers should be limited and when controversial provisions should expire.
Protections sought
Democrats, civil liberty groups and businesses argue that some of the powers under the Patriot Act need to be reeled in to protect the civil liberties of millions of Americans.
"If they do a sweep of all the library records, medical records or gun records, it affects a broad swath of people," said Joseph Onek, senior policy analyst for the Open Society Institute, a civil liberties group.
Republicans and White House officials call the Patriot Act an important tool that should be maintained in the war against terrorism.
"There is an ongoing need for the Patriot Act and protecting our society," said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chair of the Judiciary Committee.
One sticking point is a section called "the library provision," which allows federal officials to get records from such places as libraries, financial and medical institutions and businesses as long as they say it is part of a counterterrorism investigation. The requests are secret and people are barred from discussing them.
The right to challenge
The Senate bill limits whom federal officials could target, requires more explanations about why the records are relevant and more details about the records needed. It also gives people the right to challenge the request.
Under the House version, people would be able to challenge a request in certain situations. But the government would gain more latitude in which records it can seek.
The act also gives federal officials the authority to conduct so-called "sneak and peek" searches of businesses and homes. The Senate bill delays notification for up to seven days, with some exceptions, while the House measure allows up to 180 days, also with some extensions.
Neither proposal addresses concerns over provisions that allow the government to lock up foreign nationals without charges and freeze assets based on secret evidence, noted David Cole, a civil liberties expert at Georgetown University.
"There are many provisions that raise fundamental First Amendment, due process concerns that simply have been ignored by Congress," Cole said.
House and Senate conferees also will try to reach agreement on whether certain provisions should expire in four or 10 years. House lawmakers voted Wednesday to urge conferees to require that three provisions, including the library records, terminate in four years.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-NY, said all the provisions, many of which he called problematic from the start, should expire in four years.
"A 10-year sunset is no sunset at all," Nadler said. "Who is going to remember it?"
Republicans say much of the act should stay intact and argue there is no evidence of abuse.
"Some people are creating imaginary problems...I just don't see them," said Rep. Peter King, R-NY, chairman of the Homeland Security Committee and a House conferee. "The Patriot Act has done its job."
In Paterson, Goow acknowledges that the city's anti-Patriot Act resolution is nonbinding. Still, he hopes it pressures his Washington counterparts to revise the law.
"It's Arab Americans now," said Goow, who has a framed copy of his city's resolution hanging in his home. "What's going to happen tomorrow if it's another ethnic group? Nobody is really watching the store here."
