After receiving sharp criticism, Attorney General John Ashcroft has decided to release a fragment of information available on how the USA Patriot Act is being used in libraries. This follows pointed words by Ashcroft, characterizing the concern voiced by those worried about library surveillance as “hysterics.” Ashcroft made public a confidential memo to FBI Director, Robert Mueller, which revealed that the government has not yet used the provision that allows it to monitor records from libraries and bookstores. In a speech last Thursday Ashcroft stated, “The fact is, with just 11,000 FBI agents and over a billion visitors to America's libraries each year, the Department of Justice has neither the staffing, the time, nor the inclination to monitor the reading habits of Americans. No offense to the American Library Association, but we just don't care. . .” The Department of Justice did not disclose how they have used national security letters, a similar device used to obtain business records, although sources say that such letters have been used dozens of times. Although the release of the library information is a positive step for the department, the reluctance to release any other information on how the Patriot Act is used is troubling. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) brought a complaint to court last October under the Freedom of Information Act in order to access this very information. The case was dismissed, only to be told the information was classified, Congress also asked the Justice Department for information on how the act is used, and did not receive it. Ashcroft’s decision to release the information comes amidst a struggle between those who want to strengthen the Patriot Act provisions, and those who believe the act should be dismantled. Public interest groups—both liberal and conservative— and lawmakers have recently attacked portions of the legislation. ACLU filed a lawsuit July 30 challenging the section that allows FBI agents to secretly obtain records and personal belongings of citizens and permanent residents. The groups contend that the provisions violate individual rights, but because information is not made public, it is hard to point to concrete examples. Rep. C.L. “Butch” Otter (R-ID) passed a rider ro an appropriations bill in the House halting funds for the “sneak and peak” provisions of the bill that allows delayed notifications of searches. Otter is drafting additional changes to the bill stating, “what we have to do is, brick by brick, take the most egregious parts out the Patriot Act.” Conservatives also fear the law’s broad powers and are advocating for great transparency as well. The American Conservative Union worries that the broad definition of terrorists could apply to militia members or anti-abortion activists. Ashcroft and Patriot Act supporters believe the law is crucial for anti-terrorism efforts, citing examples such as the ability to connect foreign intelligence information with criminal investigators. Ashcroft is currently touring the U.S. to promote the Patriot Act and dispel myths. At the same time, he is pushing for new expansions of the law. The only way to assure the public that their rights are not being violated is to disclose more information about the Act and how it is being used.