The News Journal
December 3, 2005
by Patrick Jackson

Some folks may worry about how deeply government can delve into their private lives using computers and sophisticated software, but former FBI Director Louis Freeh said people are more worried about hackers stealing their identities and landing them in the poorhouse.

"For all the talk and concerns about the Patriot Act, the No. 1 privacy concern people have is about identity theft because of the tremendous damage it can do to their lives," said Freeh, a vice chairman and general counsel for MBNA Corp. In September, Freeh was elected to the board of Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

Freeh called for support for the renewal of the federal Patriot Act, saying the government needs the ability to perform some electronic searches for national security.

At the same time, government officials must be cautious to ensure that the nation does not emerge from its war on terrorism with too much privacy taken away in the name of security.

"The balance between privacy and security is dynamic and evolving," he told a group of lawmakers and officials from around the country gathered for the Council of State Governments' annual convention here.

Freeh, who ran the FBI for President Clinton during the 1990s and previously was a federal judge, said more of his personal information was turned up during a credit check than through some of his government security screenings. The data thieves can find by riffling through computerized credit reports and other sources are staggering, he said.

But not everyone at the conference agreed with his assessment.

State Sen. Jeff Chapman, a Republican from Georgia, said he was encouraged by Freeh's support for individual freedoms. But he said that in his part of the country, the concerns about what the federal government can learn using computers outweigh fears of identity theft.

"People take it seriously," he said of identity theft, "but they're taking steps to protect themselves. The thing I hear when I'm out with my constituents is the concern about what the government can look for through the Patriot Act."

Delaware state Sen. Steve Amick, R-Newark South, said he's hearing more concerns about safeguarding personal data from hackers and thieves than about national security issues.

"I think people are very concerned about their personal security," said Amick. "But there also are concerns about how far the government can go and what they can investigate."

Freeh said Congress took the right step in 2001 when it required the Patriot Act to come up for renewal. The reauthorization of the anti-terror Patriot Act has been delayed by ideologically diverse lawmakers who want to ensure there are checks on investigative powers. More than a dozen provisions of the law, which was passed in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, expire at the end of the year.

Freeh noted that the government has rejected calls by the military and intelligence communities to develop profiles of suspect groups. Congress also has rejected calls for a uniform national identification card.

Later in his speech, Freeh said federal and state officials must be careful to avoid the mistakes made in the 1960s and 1970s, when the FBI and local police agencies spied on civil rights and antiwar groups. That lead to congressional investigations and restrictions on those agencies that some think hindered legitimate law enforcement work.

Gerald Lange, a Democratic state representative from South Dakota, said he still worries about the abuses in the 1960s, but thinks the Patriot Act must be renewed. The scrutiny it's received during the renewal process this fall has made him feel a little better about the law.

"The ACLU part of me says this is all wrong, and that this doesn't make us safer," he said. "But it is being looked at, and some parts may change. So [Congress] is trying to find that balance."