SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the pay-no-attention-to-the-TLA-behind-the-curtain dept.
The House of Representatives passed legislation Thursday that would extend a controversial government spying power known as "Section 702" for another six years—without new privacy safeguards that had been sought by civil liberties groups.
Debate over the legislation now shifts over to the Senate, where it faces a filibuster threat from both Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).
"If this Section 702 bill comes to the Senate, I will filibuster it," Wyden wrote in a tweet shortly after the House bill passed.
Wyden opposes the legislation because he believes that it offers too few protections for Americans' privacy rights. The powers granted by Section 702 are only supposed to be used against foreigners on foreign soil. But an American's communications can get swept up in the NSA's surveillance dragnet if they communicate with people overseas. Privacy advocates have championed an amendment to impose new privacy safeguards on the use of Section 702. But it was voted down by the House on Thursday.
[...] There isn't much time for the Senate to act. Section 702 expires on January 19, a little more than a week away.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday January 12 2018, @02:56PM (17 children)
I know that the House and Senate were structured for population and equality of voice between the States, but traditionally I've always thought of the House as the body having the closer interests of the people and the Senate that of the Union.... It seems backwards to me that the House would pass and the Senate filibuster.
Aside from that curiosity, anyone remember last time 702 was reauthorized and there was so much noise about it and it felt like it barely passed.... What changed in such a way that up until now it looked like smooth sailing for it? Just Republicans in charge?
Then again, I'm biased. 9/11 was 16 years ago. When will it be time to end the perpetual sense of emergency? I guess there is no such thing as permanent as a temporary crisis.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by donkeyhotay on Friday January 12 2018, @03:47PM
I should preface this by saying that I'm pretty cynical, but since 9/11, various law enforcement agencies have received lots of money, interesting training, fun "toys" to play with and an overall sense of secularly-divine purpose that they never had before. They don't want to lose any of that. So it seems like they enjoy hyping up the threat so that this river of government and public largesse will continue to flow.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by fustakrakich on Friday January 12 2018, @03:51PM
It's all part of the Crisis Industrial Complex. It may sound all *conspiratorial* an' all, but really it's perfectly natural. Everything is an opportunity.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 12 2018, @03:55PM (9 children)
I have no faith in the Democrats here. It got to the Senate because 55 house Democrats voted along with the GOP to extend this blatantly unconstitutional provision.
Perhaps they'll surprise me, but realistically, they let the GOP get their budget extension without getting anything for it, so I'm not sure why they would have more spine about this.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 12 2018, @04:53PM (2 children)
Yes I also blame the Democrats for failing to prevent Republicans doing evil shit. Gonna vote R next time.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 12 2018, @08:49PM (1 child)
Ah, I see. You're going to keep voting R and D and just hope that shit magically fixes itself.
Maybe the original alt-right was right. Democracy can't work. Fortunately, by continuing to vote D and R, you're voting in a new aristocracy.
I hope you like what your stupidity buys you.
(Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Friday January 12 2018, @10:33PM
I believe that he was being sarcastic. Poe's Law and all.
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Sulla on Friday January 12 2018, @05:11PM (5 children)
The establishment will always make sure that legislation that helps the establishment will go through. Republicans and Democrats are the same when it comes to defending the status quo in DC, where they differ is what they claim to support to divide the masses.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 4, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Friday January 12 2018, @06:29PM (4 children)
Republicans and Democrats are the same...
80% of the Republicans voted for this bill. 34% of Democrats voted for this bill. [house.gov]
80 != 34
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 12 2018, @07:36PM (1 child)
Yes, this is an issue where Democrats claim to support privacy, so most of them get to vote against a spy bill and look good for their voters without actually changing anything. But enough voted for it to cover for the Republican "defectors" -- do you think this is an accident?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 12 2018, @08:27PM
Yeah, it sure seems the population average for evil / good people is flipped in politics. Instead of 90% decent people they are 10% decent and 90% corrupt game players.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 12 2018, @09:20PM
Meh. If the same bill came up under Obama the ratio would be flipped. Right now (and recently) there's big partisan shows/bias/however you want to look at it.
Want proof? Look at the voting records of various similar bills that did come up then...
(Score: 4, Informative) by crafoo on Saturday January 13 2018, @05:50AM
Don't be so easily fooled. Democrats didn't have to vote for this bill, _this time_, for it to pass. They certainly have in the past though. Keep in mind that Obama granted the telecoms retroactive immunity for the federal crimes they committed. They all jumped the gun on the dragnet surveillance of the public before it was technically legal. Almost right after getting elected. After promising he wouldn't. Hillary was a no-vote on the topic in her last senate vote (i.e. a coward). Deep State gonna deep state. It's what they do.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Sulla on Friday January 12 2018, @04:25PM (1 child)
With how many people there are in the congress it takes a block of good people voting to block a legislation instead of just one. I wish wyden was consistent in his standing up for rights, but his recent support of the legislation that gives jailtime and massive fines for boycotting israel owned companies shows where his loyalty lies.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 3, Interesting) by crafoo on Saturday January 13 2018, @05:53AM
You should keep in mind that Wyden holds dual-citizenship. You know, quite a lot of them do. And it's not like it's a random list of other nations either.
He has fairly consistently stood up for citizens rights, especially privacy. Overall he's probably more good than bad.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by tangomargarine on Friday January 12 2018, @05:23PM
That's a good point that I didn't even think of.
That for this to even happen in the Senate now requires a filibuster is disappointing.
Anybody remember those guys back in Rome who gave up their dictatorships willingly? What a time.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anal Pumpernickel on Saturday January 13 2018, @06:07AM
We shouldn't sacrifice our liberties even in an emergency. This kind of thing is simply never justifiable. I don't care whether the 9/11 attacks happened 16 years ago or 1 day ago. One's commitment to liberty is especially tested in hard times. If you choose to surrender liberty in difficult times, you were never a staunch supporter of it to begin with. It's amazing how hollow that 'the land of the free and the home of the brave' mantra really is. To paraphrase some retarded media pundits, 'But hey, we're better than North Korea, so be happy!'
(Score: 2) by davester666 on Monday January 15 2018, @03:46AM
wasn't the big thing the last time that there was going to be a significant change to scope of it, but then right before it was passed, an "and" was changed to an "or" (or vice versa) and it went from reducing the scope to greatly expanding the scope of the program?