Home > The Barr Code > Archives > 2008 > March > 26 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USEvery bank transaction triggers snooping
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
I am not an Eliot Spitzer fan. The now-former New York governor and I have disagreed privately and publicly on any number of issues, mostly involving questions of prosecutorial abuse. Still, I have great concern with the manner in which his fall from grace was orchestrated, and with the federal laws and regulations on which it was based. The sad saga of Spitzer should concern every American, or at least all those who maintain accounts at any financial institution or who engage in any form of electronic financial transactions.
The web of snooping in which federal investigators and regulators are now able to ensnare any person who engages in any form of financial transaction has become so complex and pervasive that almost no person anywhere in the world can escape its clutches. The ability of the government to manipulate this vast power is magnified many fold by virtue of the manner in which our laws and regulations require the active complicity of the entire cadre of persons working in, or in some manner connected with, banks and other entities that provide or facilitate financial transactions.
The seeds of this modern-day Orwellian financial web were sown in the late 1960s and early 1970s when such expansive federal laws as the Bank Secrecy Act were enacted with bipartisan support. Designed as tools to ferret out organized crime figures, major drug traffickers and international money launderers, this family of far-reaching regulatory-cum-criminal laws initially was used largely as intended. During this era also, many of the “Suspicious Activity Reports” (or SARs) required by the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970, for example, were largely ignored by investigators and prosecutors, who viewed them as burdensome and difficult to catalog and utilize. Bank employees were not pressured to file such reports as an operative component of their job descriptions.
Two events have conspired to change all that. First, the advent of digital technology has elevated dramatically the ability of the government to gather, analyze, manipulate, retrieve and disseminate the SAR data. In the digital age, there are virtually no limits on the ability of agents to use high-speed computers to identify, correlate and retrieve the data in ways limited only by imagination.
The second factor changing the power of using SARs and the reporting requirements in the sister “Currency Transaction Report” (CTRs) and other federal reporting instruments, was, of course, the events of 9/11 and the ensuing USA Patriot Act. These two things institutionalized fear as the driving force in virtually all federal policies, including those relating to financial reporting.
Now, these and other federal reporting forms must by law be filed whenever any person — terrorist, criminal or simply law-abiding student, housewife or lawyer — engages in a broadly defined “financial transaction” at an equally broadly defined “financial institution.” The SAR, for example, is triggered whenever someone in the employ of, or connected with, that institution concludes there is something “suspicious” about a transaction (either alone or in conjunction with other, perhaps nonsuspicious, activities). If the suspicions of the employee are aroused while the customer is engaged in the questionable transaction, then the law requires that the act be reported immediately.
Lest a banking customer take solace in the belief that “surely the government would not concern itself with small transactions,” be reminded that “suspicious” transactions as small as $2,000 must be reported.
Any suspicion by a bank employee, for example, that a transaction is intended to violate or evade any federal law or any federal regulation (of which there are tens of thousands on the books) could prompt a report. Reportable suspicions clearly need have nothing to do with suspected terrorist activities or even suspected violations of federal felonies.
Ignorance is bliss — the law prohibits financial institutions from notifying anyone that a “suspicious activity” has been reported to Uncle Sam.
Oh, by the way, if you think you’re safe from the prying electronic eyes of the federal government and all those employees of financial institutions spying on its behalf if you can somehow manage to keep all your banking transactions under $2,000, forget it. Another federal law — this one in the Patriot Act — has been interpreted by banking examiners to require banks to profile their customers and the full range of their transactions, regardless of amount. These “know your customer” regulations are among the most insidious of this entire class of invasive federal laws and regulations.
Services »
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By ron
March 26, 2008 8:05 AM | Link to this
Bob,As stated before,I look for a future where all financial transactions are tied to your REAL ID number.They will flag descrepancies between income and spending.Spend more than your income and you're in trouble.Spending less than your income may mean that you are tryng to avoid sales taxes,use taxes etc.I see it as the future.By Red
March 26, 2008 8:08 AM | Link to this
I can’t wait to see all of the responses of “if you don’t do a suspicious transaction, you don’t have to worry.” Remember, it doesn’t have to really be suspicious. It just has to be interpreted that way by some bank employee and off you go. Guilty until proven innocent. If you know some of these over zealous law enforcement types, then you know what I mean.
By J. D.
March 26, 2008 8:30 AM | Link to this
Is there any hope that the 10th Amendment might ever be given some meaning in order to stop these central government horrors?
By Dave
March 26, 2008 8:47 AM | Link to this
Over the last 20 years no doubt we have put in place a means to have every citizen watched by countless government agencies. Nobody seriously believes that there could ever be really more than maybe a few hundred terrorists here in America. You can legally be stopped by the police if you put a license plate bracket over your tag. This is just more of the same if they want to have you watched they have everything in place to do it with no oversite any longer. The days of needing some evidence of committing a crime and a warrant from a judge are no longer needed much any more.
By Csquared
March 26, 2008 9:12 AM | Link to this
JD, By the 10th Amendment, you mean something in the US Constitution, right? The same document that is routinely ignored by this administration at whim? There’s a better chance of BILL Clinton being President again than to get this regime to follow anything our Founding Fathers (and subsequent SANE legislation) try to create to stop such abominations. That whole “We the People” bit get lost on these folks.
By J. D.
March 26, 2008 9:23 AM | Link to this
As Cheney said, when told that over 2/3s of “the People” are against the Occupation of Iraq, “So?”. The Constitution, nor the people, have any meaning to the Democrat-Republicans.
By The truth
March 26, 2008 10:01 AM | Link to this
Ron, You’re insane. Please move to a socialist country. It’s not the governments job to keep up with what people do with their money. Are you a Hillary campaign worker? You sound crazier than she does. Someone needs to leash on you to keep from hurting yourself. Do you cut your wrist at night?
By Eric
March 26, 2008 10:20 AM | Link to this
What is a suspicious transaction? Well, that depends on who’s looking. The new religious right (i.e. the “compassionate conservatives”) have thrown off the mantle of small government that the old religious right wore in exchange for a political model that is basically a pro-life and more hawkish version of the Democrats. They may enjoy it when all the new power they give the government is wielded by someone they count a friend, like Bush or Huckabee. But the day will come when that power will be transferred to someone else, someone who sees any donation to a church that preaches homosexuality is a sin as a suspicious transaction.
By J. D.
March 26, 2008 10:22 AM | Link to this
I assume Ron’s comments to be a sad commentary on where we are headed, not agreement with same.
By Bob BFF
March 26, 2008 12:00 PM | Link to this
Thank goodness no BJ is involved! IF there were, then Bob would really understand the threat to Amerika!!!
Thanks Bob for helping keep us so safe when you were in power and had the ability to make a REAL difference. Great choices you made back then! ;-)
By Skeptic Tank
March 26, 2008 12:11 PM | Link to this
Unfortunately, while the polarization of the American people into the “liberal” versus “conservative” camps has effectively turned us against each other, the government has insidiously taken advantage of our fractured population to institute patently unconstitutional infringements of our privacy rights. While half of us squawk that we’re living in a veritable police state, the other half wraps itself in the flag and hurls insults about the lack of patriotism inherent in such claims. Meanwhile, the Founding Fathers weep.
By jabster
March 26, 2008 12:30 PM | Link to this
I think we could solve our energy and global warming problems by attaching a generator to the Framers’ spinning corpses.
By fedup
March 26, 2008 12:45 PM | Link to this
The soluton, as we all hate to admit it,is to “pink-slip” congress. Yep, tough love! It’s one thing to spy on known or associations of terrorists; it’s another thing to watch citizens engage in their day-to-day living transactions, just to “dominate” us. It’s true that this behavior goes beyond its claim to “protect”; the “beyond” is world dominance…and I think Bob Barr, and many people who work in government circles, know where all of these government projections, when linked into the puzzle, are leading…the very fact that we finance the building of a fences in Arab countries, but our elected leaders will not protect our southern borders speaks louder than a call to prayer. And, we will need alot of the latter if we don’t stop the evasive tyranny. But then, there IS something in the drinking water of Americans in large cities….!!
By Bob
March 26, 2008 1:04 PM | Link to this
Red; You are a totalitarianistic moron who deserves the total lack of privacy you espouse here. Why not just affix a camera and microphone surgically to your head and allow the government to record all your actions and just mail criminal complaints to you. Then you can be foreced to show up to in court regulary to answer for violation of one of the tens of thousands of laws and ordinances you may have broken over the last reporting period. What a stupid idea you espouse.
By legend
March 26, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this
WHEN THE OTHER SHOE FALLS, AND IT WILL, ON BUSH SPYING AND HIS ENEMA LIST (PEOPLE HE WANTS TO FLUSH), THE NATION WILL BE HORRIFIED, AND HE’S…. not going to be pardoned….when everyone finds out what a power trip he’s on. A flight of fancy.
By Anthony
March 26, 2008 3:02 PM | Link to this
Bob what the government is doing here it has been done by the cuban goverment for the las 50 years. we call it here democracy but the stuff going on in cuba is a dictartorship
By Cathy
March 26, 2008 3:32 PM | Link to this
~The sky is falling!~ The sky is falling!~ A public official was investigated because he paid out thousands of money to a questionable company. Gosh, could it have been blackmail? Legitimate reason to investigate him?
Bob Barr: Doesn’t matter, it’s his money and the public shouldn’t care.
Bottom line is that if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear. Banks typically look for transactions over $10,000 and must report them. Numerous high-dollar transactions cause more interest and investigation. Again, who cares unless you are doing something illegal and/or unethical?
If you are so worried, keep your money in a jar in your back yard, don’t use any electronic cards, …the list goes on and on. There is an electronic trail for all of us - even from churches, schools, the gym. It isn’t the end of the world, Folks.
By michelle
March 26, 2008 4:48 PM | Link to this
Cathy:
where will the government stop when it comes to our personal liberties, and where will you draw the line as well?
will it be when you’re on your next flight from atlanta to new york and they require everyone to go through a cavity search? afterall, if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear, right? i know that’s a bit extreme, but i also know i never thought i’d be subject to some of the violations of my privacy that have occurred in the last 6 1/2 years.
why are you so nonchalant about your rights?
and for the record, it WAS his money and i DON’T CARE!!!!! why should you or anyone else care what someone does with their own money in a victimless (debatable) crime?
By Skeptic Tank
March 26, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this
Cathy: Just because you and your ilk are willing to acquiesce the freedoms afforded us by our vaunted Constitution in order to enable a Big Brother government, rest assured, the rest of us are decidedly NOT willing to do so. The right to privacy is not designed to prevent disclosure of criminal intent or activity, but unfortunately, simpletons such as you are too ignorant of constitutional law and history to actually defend the things that make America, America.
By Moira
March 26, 2008 4:57 PM | Link to this
I’ve worked for a couple of major banks in the area of regulatory compliance. Let’s not forget the massive fines that banks face for non-compliance with the government’s mandates for SAR and CTR filing—and many have been fined tens of millions of dollars. Armies of bank examiners are auditing banks every day for violations. Banks are spending billions of dollars for staffing and technology in order to comply, all with no government subsidization. In essence, the banks have been forcibly deputized by the state to turn over the personal information of our customers.
By The Peoples for a Nuked Amerika' Century~!
March 26, 2008 6:13 PM | Link to this
Thomas Jefferson:
“The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite.”
So now we are slowly becoming a despotic government as we allow the government to rule us rather than “We the People” rule the government. Yes you will be watched in everything you do and every dime you spend, and will be denied reasonable justice.
Forget big brother - this is simply America becoming a fascist regime of a government controlled society that even our founding fathers predicted over 200 years ago.
[A small history of the national bank] (http://www.civil-liberties.com/cases/bank.html)
Just add water and a secret shadow government.
Cheers’
By James
March 27, 2008 7:44 AM | Link to this
Cathy: You’re right - if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear. Can you post all your financial information for the past 20 years on this blog? We would love to see tax returns, pay stubs, all your bank and investment account statements, credit card receipts, and a notorized statement of all the cash transactions you can remember. We will also need that information from everyone in your household. Since you have nothing to hide I’ll expect you to post it by the end of the day. Thanks, I’m sure it will be good reading material for everyone! P.S. everyone else should post the same info - unless of course you have something to hide.
By Copyleft
March 27, 2008 8:10 AM | Link to this
“if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear.”
This attitude (and the passive, security-seeking mindset it reflects) is the single greatest threat to American freedom. Willingness to surrender your freedoms to government poses a much greater risk to our society than any number of hijackers or religious nuts ever could.