Big Brother is watching you

Big Brother is watching you. People have always been paranoid about the power of government. But with the recent rejection of the Udall Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, the idea of Big Brother taking you in the middle of the night has become more real.

A National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) has been passed each of the past 48 fiscal years to determine the expenditures and budget of the United States military. This is standard fair for Congress. But this year, two provisions have been put into the NDAA that allow for heinous abuse of military power.

As the ACLU has pointed out, sections 1031 and 1032 of the NDAA would “explicitly authorize the federal government to indefinitely imprison without charge or trial American citizens and others picked up inside and outside the United States.”

Stew over that for a second. If the new NDAA passes, which is a bill essential to the operation of our military, American citizens could be detained without trial and without charge, indefinitely. 

To make matters worse, the provisions would mandate that these detentions would be military detentions, severely limiting the Justice Department’s ability to do anything at all. And this isn’t just Americans abroad. If the new bill passes, you could be taken from your own home and put in a military prison indefinitely.

All of this in the name of terrorism. It is important enough to Republicans to capture suspected terrorists that we should sacrifice our own personal security. Mind you, prisoners being held indefinitely without charge is what led to the closing of Guantanamo Bay.

Makes sense, right

Of course, a reasonable government wouldn’t abuse this power, right? In fact, The New York Times reports that in recent days the secretary of defense, the director of national intelligence and the director of the FBI have all spoken out in opposition to the proposals, along with several former counter-terrorism officials from the Bush administration.

While a government might not abuse this power, why should it ever be given the opportunity to? 

Simply put, there is no need for these provisions. Common sense demands it, and high-ranking government officials confirm it.

Yet the recent Udall Amendment to remove these sections from the NDAA failed to pass 37-64, with only two Republicans voting for the amendment and 16 Democrats voting against it. What do those voting for provisions to allow the indefinite detainment of American citizens without charge say about it? Sen. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina said that the provision will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield.”

Is that really a good thing? I can’t imagine anyone supporting a measure that makes our homeland part of the battlefield. But a sizable majority of the Senate thinks it is a great idea.

These provisions have flown under the radar until just recently. Because they are only three to four provisions in a bill that is more than 500 pages long, it was easy for it to go unnoticed. To add to that, the bill was drafted in secret by Sens. John McCain and Carl Levin and passed through committee without a single public hearing. It’s almost as though they both knew it would be wildly unpopular and tried to sneak it past Americans.

Each and every year, people complain about how a 1984-esque police state is getting closer and closer. 

If you don’t want that to become a reality, please write to your Mississippi senators and let them know. Let’s keep the battlefield where the battles actually are.

Jay Nogami is a sophomore public policy leadership major from Denver, Colo. Follow him on Twitter @JayTNogami.