Thursday, April 10, 2003
Copyright © Las Vegas Mercury

Government knows best

Critics charge state anti-terrorism bill would undermine democracy

By Larry Wills

The Nevada Legislature is having second thoughts about a homeland security bill that would slam the doors on Nevada's open society. The Assembly Judiciary Committee is meeting with critics of Assembly Bill 441 to water down provisions that would make many public documents secret.

That's what they worry about if AB441 were to reach the governor's desk in its original form. Opponents such as the ACLU and the Nevada Press Association wonder which documents would be made secret, the effect on civil rights and whether the public would be kept in the dark about the workings of state government.

But Assemblyman William Horne, D-Las Vegas, who was working on the details of the legislation last weekend, sought to assure critics that rights will be protected. "I do realize it's a delicate area with the First Amendment," he said. "There are no intentions on sealing documents."

That, however, was not the tenor of the debate last week, when the first version of the bill was discussed. The original bill would have removed building plans, maps and drawings from public view, if those materials could be used by terrorists. Movements of state officials would be classified in emergencies and citizens of other countries could be denied Nevada driver's licenses. A 12-member commission would determine areas vulnerable to terrorism.

Horne says many states are passing similar legislation based on the federal USA PATRIOT Act, which gives broad powers to the executive branch. The state Senate already has passed that version. But Horne believes its approach is too restrictive.

"I recognize we do have the PATRIOT Act, but I'm not as likely to ride that horse," he says. "There's no way we're going to have a police state, shutting everything down. But there is a need for some things to be classified as well. We need to seal classified information that can be used with terrorist acts in mind."

But what kind of information would that be? Horne concedes that building plans are routinely studied by architecture students, and monuments such as the Hoover Dam are classic subjects of examination. "It's a great thing to learn from," he says.

Also, it may be too late to classify much of that data.

And maps? The military has already classified maps of sensitive areas, such as Area 51 and the Nellis Range. The only things left are street plans for Henderson and Winnemucca, showing the locations of laundries and beauty shops.

Last week, at the Assembly Judiciary Committee hearing, ACLU lobbyist Laura Mijanovich testified that AB441 could be used to suppress political dissent.

"I don't think there's any question on that," says Gary Peck, ACLU of Nevada's executive director. "The language they adopted tends to be over-broad in such a way that they create laws that apply not just to threats of terrorism, but would apply much more broadly to matters that the public has a right to know."

That's always the rub. Give government too much power and it will abuse it. Once documents are made secret, only the governor could release them.

The issue could mirror a national uproar 30 years ago when federal officials, stung by the Pentagon Papers, an enemies list and the Watergate burglary, took a hard look at what information was kept from the public. Among other things was a confidential military document from the War of 1812.

Horne believes the debate could end up in court. He says if officials abuse their authority, hiding embarrassing documents from the public, such as those pertaining to the over-budget and hopelessly delayed Regional Justice Center construction project or the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, lawsuits may have to be filed.

"We want to make sure that the intent is in the bill what it is to accomplish and not to accomplish," he says, noting that courts can then clearly discern the Legislature's intent.

Kent Lauer, executive director of the Nevada Press Association, isn't so sure. "Closing off those records would make it impossible to monitor construction projects to determine if they are flawed," he told the committee last week. "Public information can be used for good and evil purposes." Further, he said, families "deserve to know if state and local governments have taken adequate steps to protect their safety and they have efficiently prepared for disasters. They need to evaluate if tax dollars are spent wisely."

Lauer noted that "making school plans secret would prevent the public from ensuring they are built properly under fire code and sprinkler laws."

Peck hopes the tougher Senate bill will be discarded and cooler heads will prevail in the Assembly. "On the Assembly side, all are recognizing the need for more carefully crafted language," he says. "I hope the Assembly stays the course and continues to resist them" in the Senate.

The committee is expected to receive Horne's report this week.