The Tide In Congress Has Shifted Against NSA Surveillance
from the it's-not-going-to-last dept
The surprisingly close vote against the Amash amdendment in the House last week signaled a real (and somewhat momentous) shift in Congress against the NSA's surveillance practices. While some have tried to brush it off because the amendment failed, the vote was so close that even supporters of the program have realized it needs to change. On top of that, more and more of those who voted against Amash have since made public statements about how they're against the NSA practice as well, but they just didn't like the Amash amendment itself. It's even gotten so crazy that one of the staunchest defenders of NSA surveillance, Senator Saxby Chambliss, has even admitted that changes need to be made to "make things more transparent." That's certainly not an agreement that the program needs to go, but this is the same guy who said that Congress shouldn't even debate the issue last year when the FISA Amendments Act was up for discussion. For him now to admit that they need to be more transparent is a very clear statement that even he realizes the programs are in trouble.The NY Times has a detailed look at how the momentum in Congress is clearly against the excessive surveillance by the NSA, even if the Amash amendment didn't pass. It notes that when the amendment was first proposed, most felt that only "wingnuts" would vote for it. Then nearly half of the House did... and many who didn't are making it clear that the program needs to change.
On Friday, Ms. Pelosi, the House minority leader and a veteran of the Intelligence Committee, and Mr. Hoyer dashed off a letter to the president warning that even those Democrats who had stayed with him on the issue on Wednesday would be seeking changes.Similarly, the Washington Post is also noting that reform of the NSA programs is "inevitable" at this point. It highlights a proposal from Rep. Adam Schiff to create a pool of attorneys who will represent "the other side" in FISA court hearings, so that there's at least some sort of adversarial hearing. However, the article then notes that there are a ton of different proposals being introduced to scale back the NSA's efforts:
That letter included the signature of Mr. Conyers, who is rallying an increasingly unified Democratic caucus to his side, as well as 61 House Democrats who voted no on Wednesday but are now publicly signaling their discontent.
“Although some of us voted for and others against the amendment, we all agree that there are lingering questions and concerns about the current” data collection program, the letter stated.
Indeed — whatever the chances of Schiff’s proposal — what is striking is the myriad of different angles from which lawmakers are now trying to chip away at this once seemingly impregnable NSA surveillance monolith. There is the proposal to require the FISA court to declassify key opinions authorizing surveillance, which is backed by at least a dozen Senators, including (ostensibly) by some Dem leaders. There is another proposal to require Senate confirmation of FISA court judges. Senator Richard Blumenthal has also suggested several other ideas designed to bring transparency to the FISA court proceeding and provide for outside groups to weigh in before the court authorizes the government’s request.And there are more coming beyond that as well. Basically, it's becoming quite clear that Congress isn't going to let this slide. All of this brings to mind two key points:
- For all the Ed Snowden bashing going on among officials, his whistleblowing is going to create at least some sort of change. Whether it goes far enough is still yet to be determined, but the leaks clearly were not ignored and are having a very, very real impact. I still find it difficult to see how those in Congress who are supportive of reforming the surveillance efforts are still attacking Snowden. If he wasn't whistleblowing, then why are they now (finally) eager to change the program? Clearly, he was exposing abuse -- abuse which even those in Congress now admit is a problem.
- This also highlights the other big lie from major defenders of the program, in which they like to suggest that everyone in Congress was aware of and approved these surveillance programs. That clearly is not true. If that was the case, Congress wouldn't be quite so willing to change things. Yes, there is the cynical truth that some who probably did know and did support it are now changing their tune once they've realized that the public isn't so happy about this, but that's really yet another reason why such secrecy is a problem. Congress is supposed to represent the people, and now that the public is making it clear that they're not happy, Congress is moving to (try to) fix these programs.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: congress, nsa, nsa surveillance, saxby chambliss, surveillance, transparency
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The president needs to be kept in the same conditions that rank and file military soldiers are kept in. The Whitehouse would only be available to him for 'official functions'. No healthcare beyond that of a normal rank and file military member (non-officer) should be available to any member of congress or the president.
If you want them to care about anyone that isn't incredibly rich then make sure they're not rich. They'll care about themselves, which will force them to care about the class they're in, which will force them to care about the average citizen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
* more power
* more money
* less accountability
Those are the promises that must be kept.
They don't give a hoot about jobs. In fact, the fewer people involved in the inner circle jerk, the better, the bigger the cut for each.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The transparency proposed seems too limited in scope to begin with.
Meanwhile the private contractors are raking in the monies and sending a good deal back to politicians. It is an old praxis, but when you raise the spending like patriot act did, you will inevitably make the problem a lot worse... Private contractors probably do not even want money, as long as they can get access like Snowden and make some industrial discoveries they are probably happy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More transparency is needed
> need to be made to "make things more transparent."
Yes. Things right in front of you can be made more transparent so you cannot see them.
I love the new definition of transparency in government.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
One step forward
But I still want to see the entire spying program eliminated.
As in: "Dude, you're fired!" and mean it.
Let's just wait and see if Congress actually has the balls to continue with it.
Right now, they're brave from all the nasty exposure. Once it isn't a news story, there goes the bravery, and it's back to business as usual.
"That was a close call, there. We almost had to do our jobs!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: One step forward
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Edward Snowden is a traitor?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Edward Snowden is a traitor?
> release of confidential information, what does a patriot do?
Is that a trick question?
A PATRIOT would ACT to:
* implement a new surveillance state
* create constitution-free zones around the borders
* create secret courts
* create secret laws
* create secret interpretations of laws
* have (or create!) secret enemies
* create secret prisons
* secret extraditions to secret prisions
* torture prisoners
* eliminate due process, challenge or appeals
* do away with several parts of the constitution in the name of safety
* gag you from even speaking that you have been served with a warrant to tap someone's private communications
These things may seem disturbing. But in the end, comrade, they will be for the betterment of the state.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Edward Snowden is a traitor?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Edward Snowden is a traitor?
Playing loud RIAA music is not torture, it's enhanced interrogation techniques.
We've got to take nail clippers away from grandmothers because... TERRORISM!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Edward Snowden is a traitor?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not that I'm accusing our government of lying to use or anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I call BULLSHIT
NOW, because of the close vote, they're saying "Oops, well, changes still need to be made, we just didn't like this one."
Bullshit... big steaming piles of it.
Voting FOR the Amash Amendment instead of playing a negotiating game with our civil liberties was the correct course of action. Now, in my eyes, any politician who didn't vote for Amash is just talking out both sides of their face.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I call BULLSHIT
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They only profess change if they get caught
I disagree with your statement Mike. Congress as a whole is fully aware of a lot of things that they allow until the public hears of it and yells 'rat'. Then they are always willing to change things after they are caught.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Funding
The one thing I should note about sequestering budgets is that it usually involves refinancing a government agency. The Amash Amendment called for defunding the NSA.
I'm sort of reminded about how NASA's budget was stripped and how they greatly affected how it operated. We cannot defund the NSA. Yes we need a way less intrusive program in it, but defunding it will not allow resources to be open to reinvent the NSA. The Amash Amendment made good changes, but it also defended the NSA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Funding
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Funding
PRISM needs to be dialed back or changed but not demolished because of the newer, better technology involved with it. I'd say spy only if we are warned by a government about someone, or that person had a criminal history to prove it. No domestically spying on US Citizens regardless of where they are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Defunding it publicly will only shift the funding to the black budget where no one can point to the source of it's finances from the public side. Another of those 'the public is the enemy' themes.
I trust absolutely no one in congress today with few exceptions to do the right thing and end this. It only appears they are willing to accept some sort of change because they've been caught with their hand in the cookie jar while everyone was watching so to say. That doesn't mean they are willing to make the changes necessary and things like calling for Snowden's return for judicial punishment while ignoring Clapper's perjury speaks far more loudly to me than the mutterings of congress after the citizens are irate. No one in authority appears to be serious about accountability but rather about poll numbers and 3 card monte.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In other news, The Crusher vows vengeance on Rick Rude.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The tyrannical statists don't care, and will never let it happen. It being the reeling in of the NSA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Remember when the tide turned against SOPA?
The mega upload fiasco response was quick. (Too quick to get it right, and that will be its undoing.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nothing new under the sun.........
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Funds
[ link to this | view in chronology ]