Congress Fast-Tracks Bill That Would Give DHS Agencies Access To NSA Collections
from the natsec-promiscuity dept
As a parting gift to the incoming president, Barack Obama approved information-sharing rules which gave sixteen federal agencies access to unminimized NSA collections. The whole list of agencies involved in the information sharing can be found at the ODNI's (Office of the Director of National Intelligence) website:
Two independent agencies—the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA);
Eight Department of Defense elements—the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the National Security Agency (NSA), the National Geospatial- Intelligence Agency (NGA), the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), and intelligence elements of the four DoD services; the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force.
Seven elements of other departments and agencies—the Department of Energy’s Office of Intelligence and Counter-Intelligence; the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis and U.S. Coast Guard Intelligence; the Department of Justice’s Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Agency’s Office of National Security Intelligence; the Department of State’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research; and the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis.
Yes, the collected communications can be masked to protect the identities of US persons, but that call is made on a case-by-case basis by the NSA and there are several government officials with the power to demand unminimized access.
This just isn't enough sharing, apparently. Patrick G. Eddington of CATO reports a new bill is being quickly and quietly pushed through the House to expand this sharing to several more federal agencies.
Introduced on April 26 by Rep. John Katko (R-NY), the “Improving Fusion Centers’ Access to Information Act” (HR 2169) is designed to plug any “information gaps” in state “fusion centers” by modifying the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to require DHS to
identify Federal databases and datasets, including databases and datasets used, operated, or managed by Department components, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Department of the Treasury, that are appropriate, in accordance with Federal laws and policies, to address any gaps identified pursuant to paragraph (2), for inclusion in the information sharing environment and coordinate with the appropriate Federal agency to deploy or access such databases and datasets;
The DHS is already on the list of agencies with access to NSA collections. This bill would allow it to give underling agencies access to the same info. Some notable three-letter agencies on that list include CBP, ICE, and TSA. While the NSA's collections are supposed to serve a national security purpose, the FBI uses its access for standard criminal investigations. There's no reason to believe these agencies won't do the same.
But the bill has friends everywhere in the House. The bill was passed after 40 minutes of debate, thanks to a suspension of normal voting rules. The normal concerns for national security were voiced, but nothing was said of the NSA collection's routine use in routine, domestic criminal investigations. That Congress considers expanded information sharing with domestic security agencies "non-controversial" (hence the sped-up voting process) is an indication of the majority's view of the privacy/security balancing act.
Worse, if the bill becomes law, the worst, most ineffective parts of the DHS will be given access to data and communications gathered by the NSA. Fusion centers -- which are already known for being mostly useless, when not actively doing damage to Constitutional rights -- will have even more information to misuse. The bill would give bicycles to fish in all 50 states. The only thing guaranteed is the new powers will be used badly. Eddington quotes from a 2012 report from the Senate Homeland Security Committee, which found DHS Fusion Centers to be expensive, useless, and a harm to the public.
The Department of Homeland Security estimated that it had spent somewhere between $289 million and $1.4 billion in public funds to support state and local fusion centers since 2003, broad estimates that differ by over $1 billion.
The investigation found that DHS intelligence officers assigned to state and local fusion centers produced intelligence of “uneven quality – oftentimes shoddy, rarely timely, sometimes endangering citizens’ civil liberties and Privacy Act protections, occasionally taken from already-published public sources, and more often than not unrelated to terrorism.”
This is where the NSA's collections will ultimately end up: in the hands of DHS branch offices that do little more than repeatedly screw up. Only now, they'll be able to do significantly more harm to Americans' civil liberties. Add to that the routine clusterfuck that is the CBP, ICE, and TSA, and you have a recipe for massive Fourth Amendment violations under the pretense of national security.
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, data sharing, dhs, nsa, surveillance
Reader Comments
The First Word
“A democrat stands up and says "Thank you gentlemen. This will make the FBI's investigation of Trump's Russia connections much easier."
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
"Barack Obama approved information-sharing rules..."
Well, I think the new President should handle that like he's treated all other Obama actions: nullify immediately. That ought to show those privacy-hoarding snowflakes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As long as they have their cell phones, movies, and entertainment you can murder people with a certain level of abandon, before they notice anything is amiss.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My Theory
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
??
So please clearly state the specific "problem" you are hinting at here.
Your Constitutional, duly elected representatives voted for this bill-- do you somehow object to that governmental procedure ?
Were these Congressmen somehow acting outside their authority ? What's your beef here ?
If you can't identify the "problem" -- you have little hope of solving it.
Instead of constant hand wringing over endless minutiae of perceived Potomac malpractice, please attempt a more fundamental look/analysis on what is causing all this stuff that you don't like. (CAUTION: this requires deep thinking)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ??
The "problem" is manifold. Let's start with blind voting along party lines, where bills like this are rushed through without any real debate. Then we can talk about how poorly our "representatives" actually represent the will of the people, thanks to rampant Gerrymandering and unfettered campaign contributions. Then maybe we can discuss this culture of "collect everything" that is pervasive among agencies which are not headed by elected officials, even though it's been shown time and again that, not only is the data subject to abuse, but it doesn't actually perform the prescribed function, the signal gets lost in the noise. We might then finish up with the thought that laws aren't a great benchmark for determining the wrongdoings of those who make the laws, because, as the saying goes, who watches the watchers?
Problems are easy. Solutions are what require deep thought.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ??
Manifold = "many & varied" = totally unhelpful to the discussion here
if your elected representatives are voting "blind" -- why do they do that ?
keep asking "Why" at every step of event sequence and that will lead you to the root problem, eventually
{Hint: it's a system problem}
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ??
The system is not broken, the people are.
If the people shuffled off the bullshit party doctrines and said, I don't care that you are a member of my party you are corrupt so I will not vote for you, a lot of shit would get fixed and damn fast too!
We "The People" are broken, ignorant, and accepting of corruption.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Apparently this still needs to be said regularly
We build a civilization from the people we have, not the people we wish we had.
Ours are pretty much the same kind of people all other nations have to work with. That people don't vote their consciences, or cannot fathom their own best interests are failures of a system that didn't take them into account.
Give the US Constitution a break: It was an early attempt at Western democracy. And it's just very difficult to start over again, especially when everyone who has power wants to keep it for themselves.
It may mean we have to break it to fix it, or at least reach a crisis critical enough. I thought Bush was that crisis when he lead us into a war on false pretenses, used mercenaries to commit war crimes and institutionalized extrajudicial detention and torture.
But apparently that wasn't bad enough. So now we have Trump.
I bet he's not bad enough either. Not bad enough for us to unify and force change under threat of mass revolt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Apparently this still needs to be said regularly
Those of us who engage in partisan pattycake are to blame for this. It will end when they knock it off and put country first, not party.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The advantages of being raised by television and cinema?
I guess having grown up watching TV and movies, there were certain common indicators that a guy was the bad guy. And common indicators that a given society was an oppressive dystopia (usually based on Nazi Germany or the USSR).
So when those things appeared in our own societies being done by our own leaders, it lead me to start going something's not right.
The true horror is when pundits and neighbors started justifying that this is okay. Torture? Really? WTF?
I wrote a blog piece about a year ago discussing the deal-with-the-devil as a literary device, noting that once we decide the devil is real, that things or someones are evil by definition, it's a short step to deciding how anything we do to them is justifiable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The advantages of being raised by television and cinema?
As I've noted myself, this is due to the abandonment of traditional values. Conservatism doesn't mean what it used to mean, and I've got a problem with that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A democrat stands up and says "Thank you gentlemen. This will make the FBI's investigation of Trump's Russia connections much easier."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
But nobody ever considers the risk of granting themselves additional powers, even though those powers get passed on to their opponents when an election is lost.
Moral of the story: Don't make any self-serving rules that you wouldn't want your worst enemy to be able to use against you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
They have to /really/ screw up and get caught during their administration or afterwards to break that protection.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Given the interview between Oliver and Snowden...
...that means our dick-pics will be far more accessible to hackers and graphics sharing sites than ever before.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This might actually help...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Last Word
“A democrat stands up and says "Thank you gentlemen. This will make the FBI's investigation of Trump's Russia connections much easier."