Patriotic bipartisanship

TWO IMPORTANT balancing acts are in jeopardy as Congress works late debating reauthorization of the 2001 Patriot Act.

One is the need to give effective terrorism-fighting tools to law enforcement agencies without allowing them to trample on citizens' civil liberties. The other balancing act is resolving the issue through a rare commodity in Washington: bipartisanship.

For many months, six senators -- three from each party -- worked to smooth the roughest edges of the Patriot Act. Their efforts were rewarded when the Senate approved their measure with such overwhelming support it required only a voice vote.

However, the House was meanwhile advancing a version that did little to deal with the law's excesses. For the past two days, House-Senate conferees have floated versions of a bill, crafted almost entirely by the Republican leaders, that are far from adequate. The six bipartisan senators promptly and properly expressed ''deep concern" and said in a letter yesterday, ''The conference report, in its current form, in unacceptable."

Specifically, the six want to insist on something close to the Senate version of several key issues:

That investigators not be given the power to conduct ''fishing expeditions," but be required to convince a judge that personal information they are seeking has some connection to a suspected terrorist or spy.

That persons have a legal right to challenge gag orders.

That controversial provisions continue to have sunset clauses, under which they would expire unless reauthorized in another four years.

That targets of ''sneak-and-peak" searches be notified within seven days.

''The changes are modest and do not undermine law enforcement," Senator John Sununu, a New Hampshire Republican and one of the six, said yesterday in a telephone interview. The other five are Larry Craig of Idaho and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, both Republicans, and three Democrats, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, and Ken Salazar of Colorado.

It is hard to imagine why government needs the power to impose gag orders, and it's indefensible that Congress would consider taking away citizens' right to challenge them.

Equally troubling is that the House and some Senate Republicans, with support from the White House, have given so little weight to the bipartisan Senate effort. Earlier this year, the bipartisan ''Gang of 14" prevented a blowup over judicial appointments, at least temporarily.

In a year with far too much political rancor, a second bipartisan success story should not be too much to hope for.