Tuesday, November 11, 2003
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

Privacy lost, volunteer says

Because of Patriot Act, bank requests personal data from board members

Rebecca Foster speaks Sunday about a letter she received from her homeowners association's bank, which asked for personal information. The Patriot Act requires the information, and Foster and other association board members consider that an invasion of their privacy. Photo by Craig L. Moran.

When Rebecca Foster offered to serve on the board of her homeowners association, she figured the biggest sacrifice involved her time.

But because of the requirements of the Patriot Act, the Las Vegas resident feels her volunteerism could come with a steeper price -- her privacy.

Foster first became perturbed two months ago when her association's new bank sent each board member a letter. Community Association Banc, a division of First National Bank of Nevada, had requested the dates of birth and Social Security and driver's license numbers for any board members with check-signing privileges on the account.

The personal information was necessary, the bank said in the Aug. 27 letter, "to look for any derogatory banking information" and "to check them against the government's terrorist list."

Foster and the four other board members, who represent the Heritage Estates subdivision near Lake Mead and Hollywood boulevards, had not been asked to reveal such information to their previous bank.

The stricter standards, Foster said, changed her perception of the Patriot Act, which was passed in October 2001 to broaden the government's investigatory powers after the Sept. 11, 2001, East Coast terrorist attacks. She had been relatively fond of the act when she knew very little about it -- and when it didn't hit close to home.

"I thought, 'The Patriot Act, why would it be negative?' " she said. "It's patriotic. We're going to go after the terrorists! But now I think it's really an assault on Americans and their privacy and liberties wrapped in the American flag.

"As far as I'm concerned, it could be called the Big Brother Act," said Foster, a victim of identity theft in 1995.

The five board members declined to give all of their personal information to their new bank, she said.

The American Civil Liberties Union has criticized parts of the Patriot Act and said it is loaded with provisions that trample the constitutional rights of everyday citizens. As the ACLU pushes to have some provisions of the act repealed, Nevada is shaping up as a key battleground for that debate.

Last week, the ACLU criticized the government for using the Patriot Act to gather information in a political corruption case involving strip club owner Michael Galardi and current and former county commissioners.

"This puts yet another face on what the Patriot Act means for ordinary Americans," said Gary Peck, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada. "There isn't a very compelling reason to be inquiring into these kinds of matters for every officer in every homeowners association in America. It's preposterous. Volunteer associations are a bedrock of civic participation: the Boy Scouts, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Promise Keepers.

"Are we to understand that to participate in these groups you have to submit to government inquiry? It's outrageous, and it's not a sensible way to enhance national security. The government ought to be more focused about what it is doing. If you're trying to find a needle in a haystack, the best way isn't to indiscriminately make the haystack as big as possible."

But the ACLU needs to get its facts straight, said U.S. Department of Justice spokesman Mark Corallo. No court in the nation has deemed a provision of the Patriot Act to be unconstitutional, Corallo said.

Corallo said banks and financial institutions already seek personal information from individual customers to ensure identity and to study their credit histories.

And the government, by law, does not need to establish probable cause when going after someone's financial records or banking history, he said.

"Don't be fooled by the ACLU when they talk about probable cause," Corallo said.

"They're not telling the truth. That's hogwash. Grand juries go on fishing expeditions every day. Grand juries can get subpoenas based on hearsay, innuendo and the thinnest leads. So this idea that everything in criminal law revolves around probable cause is just not true."

He said polls showed about three-fourths of Americans disagree with the ACLU's position on the Patriot Act.

By better tracking bank accounts, the U.S. government has intercepted about $130 million that was headed to terrorists, Corallo said.

Section 326 of the Patriot Act helps speed the effort of sniffing out bad guys by reducing the number of subpoenas that are sent, he said.

But compliance with the act is not the easiest thing. Different banks have different interpretations of the act.

"Banks are all over the map on this because the act is so broad and comprehensive," said Pat Lamb, general counsel for First National Bank of Nevada. "It's difficult to get your hands on what is required."

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., has said he is supportive of sunset provisions that will cause many parts of the Patriot Act to expire in 2005.

But Tim Edgar, general counsel for the ACLU in Washington, D.C., said his organization will lead a push to repeal parts of the act.

Jim "Tiny" Dancy, junior vice commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Las Vegas, said his organization has no problem with the banking checks of its check signers.

"If the government wants to double-check our trust, we're fine with that," said Dancy, a Vietnam veteran. "You could be upset with your civil liberties, or you could be laying dead in the street because some idiot got by. What's your choice?"

Foster believes otherwise. The homeowner and court clerk said she has nothing to hide but opposes any unprovoked snooping and prying by the government.

"I either will not sign the checks," Foster said, "or I just won't be on the board. ... I would rather not live than to do away with my freedom."