Madam Speaker, we are engaged in a serious war with terrorism. But we are going after the wrong targets. We are not protecting ourselves, but we are attacking our liberties. We are not doing anything adequate to secure the loose nuclear materials all over the former Soviet Union before they are smuggled to al Qaeda to make atomic bombs.

We search only 5 percent of the 9 million shipping containers that come into our country every year, any one of which could contain a weapon of mass destruction.

But what are we doing? Well, the President has orchestrated a secret conspiracy to violate the criminal law by ordering clearly illegal domestic surveillance.

And now we renew the PATRIOT Act with some of the worst provisions only cosmetically changed and continuing to threaten civil liberties. Section 215 allows the government to obtain business reports about people, including library, medical and various other types of business records, as long as they are ``sought for a terrorism investigation.''

The government simply has to come up with a statement of facts showing there are reasonable grounds to believe that tangible things sought are relevant to an authorized investigation. Relevant? Almost anything can be relevant.

To make matters worse, the recipients of a section 215 order are subject to an almost unreviewable automatic gag order. Now we are told, under this bill, that judicial review can take place after a year. At best. A year? And in order to prevail in challenging a gag order, a certification by the government that disclosure would harm national security or impair diplomatic relations would be conclusive, unless shown it would be in bad faith.

Conclusive? No evidentiary showing, no evidentiary test. That is absurd. That means there is no test at all. Section 505 authorizes FBI field office directors to collect in secret almost limitless sensitive personal information from entities simply by issuing national security letters.

The FBI can simply say they want your private and sensitive information and they can get it. This is very much like the writ of assistance the British used to grant in 1761 that helped start the American Revolution. Under the conference report, recipients would theoretically have the ability to challenge these gag orders, but again that will be virtually impossible.

As with section 215, the government's assertion that the gag order is necessary to protect the national security would be a conclusive presumption that the government is telling the truth that the gag order could stand.

You can only challenge the government's bad faith. This automatic permanent gag rule very likely violates the first amendment, as two courts have already found. We ought to have real protections. We ought to have some procedural safeguards in the PATRIOT Act such as our entire American tradition demands.

The conference report does not replace the section 215 showing of relevance standard with the three-part test that was the basis of the Senate compromise which provided some meaningful due process protections. It should.

The conference report does not restore the section 505 previous standard of specific and articulable facts connecting the records sought to a suspected terrorist. It should.

The conference report does not allow recipients of section 215 orders and national security letters a meaningful court challenge to the gag order. It should.

And, finally, the conference report does not sunset section 505, national security letters, in 4 years. It should.

I very much urge defeat of this PATRIOT Act reauthorization so that we can mend the bill so it doesn't destroy our constitutional liberties. Mend it, not end it. But this doesn't help.