The Patriot Act is set to expire on Dec. 31, 2005 but President Bush and his administration are actively campaigning for Congress to extend the law permanently and expand certain provisions. The act, according to the administration, has brought law enforcement "up-to-date" so that "America no longer has to fight a digital age battle with outdated legal authorities."

But some in Congress have questioned whether parts of the Patriot Act infringe on civil liberties. They have said they want to change or remove some of its provisions, including those that give police increased access to individuals' private records.

In a written statement to the Portland Press Herald in Maine, Republican Sen. Susan Collins said the Patriot Act "was intended to update existing laws in order to give federal officials reasonable and necessary tools to combat domestic threats without sacrificing constitutional liberties."

But she said she would support an amendment that "would have more clearly defined protections for people who use computers at their libraries, schools and offices from wiretap surveillance by government investigators without judicial review."

In a radio address in April, President Bush, reminding voters that elements of the Patriot Act would expire in 2005, said of the law's naysayers: "Some politicians in Washington act as if the threat to America will also expire on that schedule.

"To abandon the Patriot Act would deprive law enforcement and intelligence officers of needed tools in the war on terror, and demonstrate willful blindness to a continuing threat," he said.

He has asked Congress to add provisions to the act, such as:
- "using administrative subpoenas, enabling law enforcement officials to obtain certain time-sensitive records more quickly -- a legal tool already used in civil and criminal matters such as health care fraud cases;
- "establishing a presumptive denial of bail in terrorism cases -- a legal tool currently used against drug dealers, which will ensure that the law does not allow suspected terrorists to be released before trial; and
- allowing the death penalty for terrorist crimes that result in death. This would close a legal loophole that enables some sexual abuse and drug-related offenses that result in death to qualify for the death penalty -- but not some terrorism crimes that result in the death of innocents."

Around the country, 283 cities and towns have passed resolutions opposing some provisions of the Patriot Act, according to Rep. Bernard Sanders, I-Vt. A February USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll reported that half of the people polled said they felt uneasy about parts of the act that allowed the FBI to obtain private records such as those from libraries, hospitals and banks.

A spokeswoman for Kerry would not say whether the senator would vote to renew the act as it is. "He wants to improve the bill," Stephanie Cutter told The New York Times. "We look forward to extending what works and improving it as well."

In the weeks and months following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, federal, state and local law enforcement officials said barriers existed that hindered efforts to track and detain those responsible for the attack and continued to plague their investigation. Those barriers, they said, included limited access to individuals' private records such as e-mail and bank records, poor communication between law enforcement agencies and strict laws limiting the use of surveillance technology.

Drafted in the wake of the attacks, the USA Patriot Act, according to the Bush administration, was created to provide law enforcement officials and intelligence agencies expanded authority to combat future attacks on U.S. soil and to provide the tools necessary to domestically pursue the Bush administration's war on terrorism.

During the signing of the law on Oct. 26, 2001 President Bush said the legislation would "help law enforcement to identify, to dismantle, to disrupt, and to punish terrorists before they strike."

"We're dealing with terrorists who operate by highly sophisticated methods and technologies, some of which were not even available when our existing laws were written," Mr. Bush said. "The bill before me takes account of the new realities and dangers posed by modern terrorists."

The day the bill was signed, Attorney General John Ashcroft listed as part of the act the following "new weapons in the war on terrorism":

- "Prosecutors will seek judicial authority to intercept communications related to an expanded list of terrorism-related crimes such as: the development, possession, or use of chemical or biological weapons; financial transaction with a terrorist government; or providing material support to terrorists or terrorist organizations. Investigators will use 'roving' wiretaps to intercept communications and thereby thwart the ability of terrorists to evade surveillance by switching phones or communication devices.

- "Investigators will now aggressively pursue terrorists on the Internet. The legislation permits investigators to obtain senders' and receivers' e-mail addresses just as it is done with telephone surveillance. Terrorists employ sophisticated technologies to evade detection and the legislation updates the law to the technology. Investigators will use search warrants to obtain unopened voice mail and e-mail.

- "New subpoena power will enable authorities to obtain payment information, such as credit card or bank account numbers, of suspected terrorists on the Internet. This will allow investigators to identify the terrorist who hides behind a fictitious Internet name.

- "Investigators will be able to use a single court order to trace a communication nationwide, even when it travels beyond the judicial district that issued the order. The scope of search warrants for unopened e-mail and other evidence will also be nationwide. This improved efficiency will save hours or days in investigations where seconds matter.

- "Law enforcement and intelligence communities will share information on terrorist activities and thus better coordinate their efforts to prevent terrorism."

But groups opposed to the bill, such as the American Civil Liberties Union, have said its provisions endanger the civil rights of American citizens and immigrants.

In an October 2001 letter to House members urging the bill's defeat, the ACLU said,
"While [the bill] contains provisions that we support, the American Civil Liberties Union believes that the USA Patriot Act gives the attorney general and federal law enforcement unnecessary and permanent new powers to violate civil liberties that go far beyond the stated goal of fighting international terrorism."

Despite such protests, the bill passed in the Senate by a vote of 98-1 and in the House of Representatives by 357-66.

-- By Kristina Nwazota, Online NewsHour