President Bush has agreed to create a "President's Board on Safeguarding Americans' Civil Liberties," but it's a bait-and-switch game that won't protect anyone's civil liberties.

In The New York Times Richard Ben-Veniste and Lance Cole

For starters, the large size of the president's board is a problem. With 20 or more people, individual members won't feel personally accountable or responsible, a fatal flaw for an effective civil liberties oversight body. But a more fundamental problem with the president's panel is the people who will serve on it.

All its members are from within government and almost all are from the very agencies and departments whose actions are likely to be the subject of civil liberties challenges and complaints. The 9/11 commission demonstrated the value of a review of government actions by disinterested individuals from outside government. Only outsiders can supply both the independence and the skepticism that are essential to evaluate the merits of governmental assertions of power that intrude on personal privacy.

In fact, the president's board seems especially unlikely to prevent one of the most serious potential problems brought on by the government's new powers - the possibility of applying them in areas that have nothing to do with terrorism. Already, the Patriot Act has been used to investigate official corruption, money-laundering and computer hacking.

President Bush originally complained about the 9/11 commission by saying that it was too partisan. So, when given the opportunity to create a group that would help protect Americans' civil liberties, he went a highly partisan route. Is anyone surprised? The Bush administration doesn't exactly have a shining record when it comes to protecting civil liberties — or even especially caring about civil liberties in the first place.

Read More:

• News on Free Speech and Civil Liberties
• 2004 Elections
• Election Polls
• George W. Bush
• John Kerry
• War on Terrorism