Melvin Watt: “I voted for the Committee on the Judiciary's version of the anti-terrorism bill. I voted against the bill that came to…”

“I voted for the Committee on the Judiciary's version of the anti-terrorism bill. I voted against the bill that came to the floor because it was a far cry from the Committee on the Judiciary's bill. I voted in the Committee on Financial Services for the money laundering provisions of the bill. And I feel like I am in a really, really difficult position with these bills, now having been put together, because the money laundering provisions which were reported out of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services, I think, are worthwhile and needed provisions and strike a good balance in terms of protecting the rights of individuals in our country. I would have thought that if any committee would have been overstepping due process bounds, it might have been the Committee on Financial Services, not the Committee on the Judiciary. So I find myself in the same position that the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) has expressed. Were the money laundering provisions a freestanding bill, I would certainly support them. But I think the Committee on the Judiciary part of this bill goes too far. And let me be blunt. Some of us, who have a different history in America, with delegation of authority to the Government and the abuse of that authority, proceed a lot differently than others when we talk about giving authority to the Government that can be abused.”