COURSEY: Something to worry about

Scary quote of the day:

"I'm a Verizon customer. I could care less if they're looking at my phone records. ... If you're not getting a call from a terrorist organization, you got nothing to worry about."

That's Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., reacting to news that the government for years has been sweeping up millions of phone records and internet data – and maybe credit card transactions and other personal information – of American citizens as part of its anti-terrorism programs.

The thought of our own government conducting such widespread, hidden surveillance is scary enough. But to think that we have members of the United States Senate who don't think it's a big deal is downright terrifying.

Graham, who once practiced law, ought to know about Americans' basic right to privacy, and how dearly we hold that right. And if he doesn't think that this kind of broad, undisclosed collection of electronic data threatens that right, maybe he should think of it in another context.

What if you found out, Senator, that agents of our government were slinking around in the dark every night and peeking into the windows of millions of Americans' homes on the off-chance they might see some kind of terrorist activity? Presuming, Senator, that you aren't engaging in any terrorist activity in your living room or bedroom or bathroom, "you got nothing to worry about" – right?

In our hyper-digital world, what the National Security Agency is doing is the equivalent of peeking into our windows.

We should worry about that.

Not because we are talking or texting to terrorists. Not because we are buying explosives or pressure cookers on the Internet. Not because we are using our banks and credit unions to launder money or YouTube to distribute child porn.

We should worry about it because we don't do any of those things. And without cause to believe we do, our government should not be allowed to be poking and prodding into our personal lives.

Of course we support our government's efforts to pursue terrorists and prevent terrorist acts. But that can be done without trampling the rights on which our democracy is based. Even former Sen. Barack Obama took that stance once, when he said the surveillance policies of then-President George W. Bush represented "a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide."

Now Obama embraces, and apparently even expands, those same policies.

Which leaves even the original author of the Patriot Act shaking his head. In a statement, Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., said on Thursday he was "extremely troubled" by the administration's interpretation of his legislation.

"Seizing phone records of millions of innocent people is excessive and un-American," he said.

Could somebody please explain that to Lindsey Graham?

Chris Coursey's blog offers a community commentary and forum, from issues of the day to the ingredients of life in Sonoma County.