The Daily Pennsylvanian: What do you feel are the most pressing issues currently facing the nation? How do they relate to your focuses in Washington?
Rep. James Sensenbrenner: The economy is obviously the most pressing issue. I believe the federal budget deficit ties into that. We've had unexpected expenditures as a result of the two hurricanes. I feel very strongly that there have to be offsets in order to pay for at least a large part of those expenditures. I do not favor canceling the tax cuts or increasing taxes. Tax increases, as I've touched on there, [are] a job killer.
The economy is not that healthy now, and this is particularly true as a result of the fact that we have a full section of the southern part of our country where nobody is working as a result of the hurricane damage.
DP: And anything particularly in Pennsylvania?
JS: I can see that the energy bill will provide jobs for Pennsylvanians because it encourages the increased use of coal. ... You know, the United States is the Saudi Arabia of coal. Pennsylvania is the largest coal-producing state in the country.
So the energy bill is going to be a huge plus for creating jobs in Pennsylvania. But it's also a huge plus in reducing our dependence on foreign sources of energy. And getting more product, particularly gas for the people, by having bigger refineries and building new refineries, because the big problem we have today is that we're living out tiny capacity.
DP: You are most nationally well-known for your association with the Patriot Act. How long do you think it will need to remain in effect, and what definite impact do you think it has made?
JS: Well, first of all let me say that the Patriot Act has been essential in busting up eight domestic al Qaeda cells, bringing the evidence against more than 400 people on terrorism-related offenses and bringing over 300 field deputies.
There has not been one complaint of civil rights abuse on any of the expanded law-enforcement sections of the Patriot Act that were enacted in October of 2001. The Patriot Act does require the inspector general of the Department of Justice to report to Congress twice a year on complaints on civil rights abuses.
There have been none.
And no part of the expansion of law-enforcement powers of the Patriot Act have been declared unconstitutional in the federal court. So I think we have done a good job of balancing out the need for better law enforcement with respect for civil liberties, which has made America a different and unique and better country than any other country in the world.
Now my committee had 12 separate hearings on the Patriot Act, and I organized those hearings so there would be a section-by-section review of the Patriot Act because some said there would be law-enforcement issues. Those hearings showed that there would be no controversy at all over 13 of the 16 sections.
The bill that the House passed makes permanent 14 of those sections. The other ones were amended and then made permanent and put sunset of 2015 -- a 10-year sunset on the other two sections. The week of October 17, I will make a motion in the House to send the bill to Conference and Senator Specter, and I will reconcile the differences between the Senate and the House bill, and my feeling is that before Thanksgiving we will reach an agreement and send the bill to the president, who will sign it.
DP: Could you go into a little detail on the two sections that are still controversial?
JS: Well, one of the controversial sections is the business-records section, the so-called "library" provision, even though it hasn't been used against libraries in the three and a half years. That's subject to a 10-year sunset and was also amended to provide for a formal way for someone who receives one of these court orders for business records to challenge that.
The other section that was amended was the so-called "roving wiretap" section. It used to be that you couldn't put a wiretap on a cell phone. And ... not only terrorists but also drug-pushers and racketeers were using cell phones because they knew they were exempt from wiretap orders so you could only order a wiretap on a land line. ... So the roving wiretap allows the court to order a tap on any phone that is being used by a target.
What we did on the House side was [that] we limited the validity of those orders to 90 days, and we allowed the FBI to go back to federal court, and it would be up to the court to make a determination of whether to grant a motion for an extension.
DP: What do you think are some of the highlights of your career? What are some of the bills you have passed that you are proud of?
JS: Well, you know I can say the Patriot Act was probably the most important one because it's made America safer and respected civil rights. The Voting Rights Act of 1982, which I helped persuade President Reagan to change his mind and sign it and not veto it, ... was really essential in allowing [voters to] actually elect people instead of having a district so gerrymandered that a minority could not effectively win an election. I think that those were the two most important bills.
In terms of the long-term scientific health of the country, I was the one that spearheaded concentrated federal research money into basic research that was largely done by universities. ... So during my four years on the Science Committee, I can see that practically every campus or university does research.
They were the right thing to do, and they were lasting.
The reason that we have a good standard of living is that we've always been the most inventive, and by changing around how we finance our research we are going to keep that advantage. And that is one of the things upon which our good standard of living is based.
DP: So what issues do you think the GOP and students, generally young America, are in agreement about?
JS: Economics and opportunity. People go to the Wharton School as either undergraduates or graduates because they want to get the skills to live the American dream and be able work their way up the economic ladder by themselves based on the sweat of their brow. And the Republicans appeal to that with what we've done and what we stand for.
I would say the biggest negative is probably the Republican stance on social issues. I would hope that people look to their long-term economic betterment because I've found in all the years I've been in politics people go through pocketbooks -- and it's true whether their on Social Security and worrying about that or whether they're 20 years old and are worrying about paying for Social Security for the next 45 years.
DP: Your current bill right now, you're doing something with steroids and federal testing?
JS: Congressman [John] Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary, and I have introduced a bill that basically has the attorney general set up standards for steroid testing for professional and major amateur sports. And I think one of the things that has provoked me into doing that is that the major-league players' union particularly has absolutely stonewalled anything effective on steroids.
And the Rafael Palmeiro scandal is the first of what will be many unless something is done to make sure that this is not an item that the players' union can stonewall, and that's what the players' union has done. And I have a feeling that bill will pass.
DP: What issues do you think will be most critical for future generations.
JS: I think economic health is the first one and homeland security is the second. If we have another 9/11, we are not going to be healthy economically. The [Federal Reserve] estimated that in the year after 9/11 we lost 3 percent of [gross domestic product], so that's money that people don't earn.
It costs some people their jobs, so instead of paying taxes they draw benefits. And even if nobody lost their job, having an economy that shrinks by 3 percent means that the government gets less individual tax revenue and less corporate tax revenue.
