Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick Introduces Bill To Smack The NSA In The Wallet For Each Data Collection Violation

from the keyed-in-the-wrong-country-code?-that's-a-paddlin' dept

Wed, Aug 21st 2013 3:40pm — Tim Cushing

Another day and another legislative attempt to rein in the NSA. NJ Congressman Rush Holt led the way by announcing his plan to introduce a bill to repeal the PATRIOT Act and the FISA Amendments act back on July 11th. This was followed by Michigan Congressman Justin Amash's attempt to attach an NSA-defunding amendment to the Dept. of Defense appropriations bill making its way through the house.

A little later, Amash's amendment suffered a narrow defeat, thanks in part to the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee withholding key information from other members of Congress. Rush Holt's bill is still a work in progress and Amash is planning legislation of his own that will set out to do what his failed amendment attempted. Meanwhile, a whole bunch of others in Congress have jumped in as well, which the ACLU has been conveniently tracking.

Now, another Congressman, Mike Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, is introducing his own legislation.

Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) proposed legislation on Monday that would cut National Security Agency (NSA) funding if it violates new surveillance rules aimed at preventing broad data collection on millions of people.

"This bill tells the NSA that if they unlawfully spy on Americans again, Congress will take away their funding," Fitzpatrick said of his NSA Accountability Act. "The bill also makes it clear that the NSA can only track Americans where strong evidence suggests they are doing wrong."

The three-term Republican said his bill is a reaction to this month's press reports saying that the NSA overstepped its bounds thousands of times as it collected data on Americans from April 2011 to March 2012. An audit published by The Washington Post reported nearly 2,800 incidents of unauthorized data collection and storage.

Unlike the NSA's surveillance efforts (zing!), Fitzpatrick's bill is specifically targeted to problematic wording in the FISA Act, making a few changes to Section 501 subsection (b)(2)(a). Here's how his proposed changes would alter the current wording. [Additions in bold, strikethru hopefully self-explanatory.]

(A) a statement of specific and articulable facts showing that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the tangible things sought are relevant and material to an authorized investigation (other than a threat assessment) conducted in accordance with subsection (a)(2) to obtain foreign intelligence information not concerning a United States person or to protect against international terrorism or ~~clandestine intelligence activities, such things being presumptively relevant to an authorized investigation if the applicant shows in the statement of the facts that they pertain to~~ clandestine intelligence activities and pertain only to an individual that is the subject of such investigation; and

~~(i) a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power;~~

~~(ii) the activities of a suspected agent of a foreign power who is the subject of such authorized investigation; or~~

~~(iii) an individual in contact with, or known to, a suspected agent of a foreign power who is the subject of such authorized investigation; and~~

(B) an enumeration of the minimization procedures adopted by the Attorney General under subsection (g) that are applicable to the retention and dissemination by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of any tangible things to be made available to the Federal Bureau of Investigation based on the order requested in such application.

What the amendment would do is (hopefully) more narrowly define "relevant." As it stands now, the FISA Act allows for the collection of tangible things presumptively relevant, which as we've seen, tends to allow for a lot of ancillary data harvesting. Fitzpatrick removes that wording and replaces it with even more specifics -- "pertain only to an individual that is the subject of such investigation." In addition, he slices out subsections (i) through (iii), which further narrows down the acceptable data the NSA can pursue.

Whether or not these wording changes will prevent extra "hops" or more massive data hauls remains to be seen. But Fitzpatrick is waving a bit of stick in the form of budget cuts should the agency reach surpass its authority.

[T]he legislation holds that any violation of Section 501 would be met with a decision to withhold all unobligated funds to carry out that section of law until the end of the fiscal year.

This may also encourage more targeted data collections, if for no other reason than so much of the NSA's work is outsourced to private contractors. Government officials may be able to protect their own paychecks in case of self-inflicted budget cuts, but they're going to have a hard time finding companies to work with them if internal malfeasance starts threatening their paychecks.

It's tough to say whether these legislative attempts have a chance in hell at passing, but the odds have vastly improved over the past few weeks. There's a ton of internal Congressional wrangling still ahead before these bills go up for a vote, but at this point, it's highly doubtful the NSA and the administration protecting it will be able to sufficiently polish their reputations before these bills hit the floor. And no matter what happens, it's refreshing to see the NSA being targeted by irate representatives and citizens, rather than the other way around.

Nsafitzpatrick (PDF)Nsafitzpatrick (Text)

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: budget, laws, mike fitzpatrick, nsa, nsa surveillance, violations

32 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 21 Aug 2013 @ 3:54pm

Techdirt Mods... Please answer
Mods.

Why are my comments being held for moderation ?

Am I being singled out for some reason or are everyone's comments in the same situation ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Michael Costanza (profile), 21 Aug 2013 @ 5:20pm
  
  Re: Techdirt Mods... Please answer
  Sorry. It appears that some time during the night, one of our 3rd-party spam filters started getting very aggressive. We're working to get that resolved.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 21 Aug 2013 @ 10:34pm
  
  Re: Techdirt Mods... Please answer
  Not a mod, but my posts almost always get into the spam filter and are held for moderation, if I wait a day I got a 50/50 chance of appearing else I know that someone miss it and just hit the delete button or didn't look or thought it really was spam.
  
  From experience in other forums I know it is difficult to look at those, there are hundreds of spam bots trying hard to get past the filters and the messages pile up like crazy.
  
  But I digress, no you are not the only one, I get the "held for moderation" often specially since I use a proxy, but I don't jump on the "why I am being censored" because mostly it seems random what they let pass or not so I believe is more likely that people look at the hundreds of spam messages and miss some of the real posts, it happens.
  
  I also believe that most people not registered are more likely to get caught on the spam filter.
  
  On a different note, thank you guys for letting anonymous people post is wonderful.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Fenderson (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 9:54am
    
    Re: Re: Techdirt Mods... Please answer
    I also believe that most people not registered are more likely to get caught on the spam filter.
    
    Perhaps so, but as a registered user I can attest that my comments get held for moderation every so often as well.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Applesauce, 21 Aug 2013 @ 4:02pm

Pointless
Hitting a gov't agency in the wallet is pointless. The only way to change behavior is to put people in jail. We know the likelihood of that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That One Guy (profile), 21 Aug 2013 @ 4:05pm

Here's an idea:
Make it retroactive.

'So it looks like you violated the law... ah, well to save time lets just say 'a couple thousand times on a monthly basis'. Taking all of those as separate incidents, it looks like your funding will be withheld until, oh about the same time Micky Mouse enters the public domain I'd say.'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 21 Aug 2013 @ 4:07pm

Oh, boy. At best, lame non-starter. -- Enforce existing laws and jail the criminals!
IF Congress actually wanted to do anything, has its own jail, so just summon* the executives and arrest them: problem solved in a matter of hours, without the endless hearings and hedging this would entail. But the whole system and everyone in it is corrupt.

[* They wouldn't bother to show up. Congress now definitely has no actual power, let alone moral strength, this is all just theater.]

Techdirt's motto: The confusion has become so complete that it's beyond correction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Aug 2013 @ 4:15pm

I predict zero violations if this passes
It's conditional on accurate reporting of violations. If this passes, they'll just re-define the word 'violation'.

(or maybe they'd wait till the last day of the fiscal year to report all their violations)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wally (profile), 21 Aug 2013 @ 4:23pm

Danger.
Is it me, or does the idea of slashing the NSA's budget seem a bit of a ref herring of an offering. I do agree to the rewording of the rules and clauses, but I can't agree to budget cuts that. 90% of the SysAdmin staff were cut to save money in the already deplorable economy so why on Earth do we have to cut something that can't afford the cut?�
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 21 Aug 2013 @ 5:01pm
  
  Re: Danger.
  Because if it can't afford the cut, it dies, and that's good?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- slinkySlim, 21 Aug 2013 @ 5:01pm
  
  Re: Danger.
  It's you. I gather that you perceive that the NSA is strapped for cash?
  
  Slashing budgets is the only recourse that the American people have. Unless you were figuring it's time to muster the militia that is.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Wally (profile), 21 Aug 2013 @ 5:30pm
    
    Re: Re: Danger.
    The biggest sign that they are already strapped for cash is that they cut 90% of its SysAdmin IT staff....in favor of automation...which isn't being supported as much as it should be for the security of the database that holds our metadata which they illegally collected.
    
    Do not punish the organization with a budget cut when you can simply fire the current heads of staff by voting for their rookie opponents.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - That One Guy (profile), 21 Aug 2013 @ 5:43pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Danger.
      Yeah, about that... if I believed for a second they were getting rid of those people for 'budget' concerns, rather than say, getting rid of potential leaks now that their dirty laundry is being aired and more people might be tempted to follow Snowden's lead, that might be a point.
      
      As-is I'm betting the mass firings have nothing to do with budget worries, and everything to do with damage control.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Wally (profile), 21 Aug 2013 @ 7:41pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Danger.
        Could be both....keep in mind though that Snowden gave up his $175,000 a year job to blow the whistle on the NSA. He was a SysAdmin as well. The NSA seems to have cut the jobs of at least 1,000 personnel in the IT department who were Snowden's peers in terms of salaries.
        
        So I'm thinking it was both.
        
        Thing about damage control is that in case there is a breach in security from an exterior source, there are far less people now to contain or isolate the problem. That's just the result of poor economy
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 21 Aug 2013 @ 9:26pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Danger.
        how can you be so wrong so often and have your errors pointed out to you and you still double down on your idiocy
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 2:40am
    
    Re: Re: Danger.
    For maximum troll effect, that money defunded from the NSA should go to EFF and the ACLU.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Aug 2013 @ 4:38pm

glad my Rep is actively joining the battle against the NSA's spying. Here's hoping for the best.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Aug 2013 @ 5:02pm

Ever since his office personally contacted me during the SOPA scare, I've liked Fitzpatrick as a Rep. Its clear that he pays attention to what people are saying and generally acts accordingly. Its great to know that he is also making bills to help curb the NSA's spying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Beech, 21 Aug 2013 @ 5:04pm

Myriad Problems
While any legislation looking to stick it to the NSA has it's heart in the right place, this is the same kind of sloppy "OMGZ We have to do something!!!1!!!" legislation that gets regularly derided here. Here's the problems I see right off the cuff.

1) Reactive instead of proactive. We have to wait until the NSA gets caught violating our privacy before this takes effect, as opposed to adding like, actual oversight to STOP them from spying on us in the first place.
2) Nothing is being done about the NSA being able to classify it's every action, so how are we to know if they violate privacy again? Trust another whistleblower will show up?
3)There's still a secret court that only hears one side of the story, and is held accountable to no one ever. This does nothing to stop the rubberstamping of warrants
4)No matter how you change the wording of who the NSA can spy on, I guarantee it will be warped over time until they are right back to "legally" spying on everyone again. Also, this doesn't address the NSA's arguments of "We're 51% sure they're foreign, so we can spy on them" or "We're only hoarding all this data, not "collecting" or "harvesting" until such time as we feel like it."
5)No one who has violated my privacy to date is being held personally accountable under this law.
6)Amnesty isn't being given to Snowden in this bill.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Pragmatic, 22 Aug 2013 @ 5:41am
  
  Re: Myriad Problems
  Agreed. They'll just push for more money in the next round of appropriations because ZOMG Terrorists!!!!111eleventyone!
  
  In which case we're back to where we started. This is legislative theater. What we actually need is to lock people up or at least fire and punish them for breaking the law and violating our Constitutional rights.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
DOlz (profile), 21 Aug 2013 @ 6:55pm

Just one more thing
If they want to make sure they rein in the NSA then they need to add a provision that they can only use the dictionary's definition of a word, instead of their reinterpitation of the word's meaning. Oh yea they also better specify which dictionary and version of it to use. These clowns can slip through smaller cracks than mice can.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Aug 2013 @ 7:55pm

This bill sounds good, but it's not enough by itself. The NSA was massively overbudgeted in the wake of 9/11. Violations or no, their budget needs to be cut by at least 50%.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 21 Aug 2013 @ 9:37pm

Like this will help?
SHUT IT DOWN!
SHUT IT DOWN!
SHUT IT DOWN!

SHUT IT DOWN!
SHUT IT DOWN!
SHUT IT DOWN!

SHUT IT DOWN!
SHUT IT DOWN!
SHUT IT DOWN!

SHUT IT DOWN!
SHUT IT DOWN!
SHUT IT DOWN!

SHUT IT DOWN!
SHUT IT DOWN!
SHUT IT DOWN!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Andrew, 21 Aug 2013 @ 10:24pm

NSA Jurisdiction
"The bill also makes it clear that the NSA can only track Americans where strong evidence suggests they are doing wrong."

This should even be in the bill. IIRC the NSA only has jurisdiction to perform surveillance outside the US. Besides foreign SIGINT, it's domestic roles are purely defensive not offensive. It is responsible to securing out nation's infrastructure either directly by providing aid or by improving cryptographic and other technologies that protect our signals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lurker Keith, 22 Aug 2013 @ 1:01am

What to do w/ all the money?
I suggest all the money saved by defunding illegal/ Unconstitutional (differentiated because they would find a loophole otherwise) activities committed by the NSA should be applied to the National Debt. That should make a significant dent.

That or education &/ or necessary infrastructure improvements (roads, utilities, internet, etc.).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 1:48am

clipping the wings of the NSA is a start but i reckon all that will happen is another agency will take over, carrying on where the NSA is forced to stop. ALL these agencies need to have the same rules imposed on them and then the other countries involved need to be fully exposed as to what they have been/are doing and they need to be stopped as well. the way it looks in the EU atm is that they are none too happy with these goings on and are ready to call a halt on any spying as well
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 7:04am

Stupid idea. They don't care about financial sanctions, besides it's taxpayer money that they are being fined.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mr. Jonz, 22 Aug 2013 @ 9:49am

They'll just steal and blackmail the money then, or maybe try to cut in on some of the CIA's drug turf.

The real solution is to put these scumbags in prison for a very long time, starting with that General Alexander bitch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 11:02am

Now, if they'll just pass it and make it retroactive like they did the immunity for the telecos, we're in business. ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rekrul, 22 Aug 2013 @ 12:45pm

And how exactly are they going to track violations? It's not like the NSA actually admits their mistakes... to anyone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
caviaremptor (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 4:01pm

[T]he legislation holds that any violation of Section 501 would be met with a decision to withhold all unobligated funds to carry out that section of law until the end of the fiscal year.

Does this mean if they violate away they just have to wait till end of year to get all that promised money back?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GEMont (profile), 11 Sep 2013 @ 3:34pm

Hmmmm.... let's see if I got this right....

Make the NSA pay a fine (drawn from taxpayer's pockets) whenever they get caught misusing taxpayer's money by breaking the "rules of engagement" laid out by law in their surveillance of the general public, known in-house as the "adversary".

Perhaps I'm missing the point, but how does this cause the NSA to stop violating their mandate and breaking the law by avoiding - or "misreading" the "rules of engagement" VS the adversary??

If I had to pay a fine to you every time I hit you, but I could drew the money for the fine out of your pocket, it would definitely not deter my attacks much.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]