Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Thursday April 30 2015, @04:46PM   Printer-friendly
from the doubtful-but-still-hopeful dept.

The Washington Post has an article discussing the proposed USA Freedom Act. The "act" is not yet an act, it is just a bill pending before before Congress, a measure that would put an end to the NSA’s bulk collection under Section 215 of the Patriot Act.

The article poses a hopeful scenario under which this bill might actually be passed by Congress, or run the risk of allowing the Patriot Act in total, to sunset by itself on June 1.

But there’s a decent chance there will be 60 votes there to pass the U.S.A. Freedom Act in the end. That’s because it’s hard to imagine that there are enough votes in the Senate to pass clean re-authorization to keep bulk surveillance going. Very few Democrats will support that. And libertarian-leaning GOP Senators who are running for president are adamantly opposed to clean re-authorization: Ted Cruz supports the U.S.A. Freedom Act, and Rand Paul may want to go further.

The article makes the case that a large enough contingent of the Senate will realize this, and jump to supporting the banning of mass surveillance, in exchange for reauthorizing some of the other (less controversial) sections of the Patriot act which they feel are more important.

A companion version of the bill has been introduced in the House, where there is already a left-right alliance against bulk surveillance. A good showing in the House might help get this passed in the Senate.

The article seems to think even President Obama would sign the act into law if passed by both houses, especially if hopeful democratic candidates put the screws to him.

The USA Freedom act may appear to be a "Hail Mary" by a few members of Congress. But circumstance and timing may may conspire to make it possible.

So it might be worth an email to your congress-critters for our U.S. Soylentils.

[Update: Removed link to incorrect version of the USA Freedom Act. According to http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/usa-freedom-act, (H.R. 2048, the USA Freedom Act) "On April 30, 2015, the House Judiciary Committee approved by a vote of 25-2 the USA Freedom Act."]

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by MrGuy on Thursday April 30 2015, @05:36PM

    by MrGuy (1007) on Thursday April 30 2015, @05:36PM (#177176)

    Other people [tumblr.com] have said it better than I can, but it's questionable this bill actually will stop mass surveillance. It will end one of the legal authorities under which the NSA currently (allegedly) conducts mass surveillance. It leaves others intact. And it brings no additional oversight to the NSA, who have a history [techdirt.com] of interpreting laws they don't like in whatever ways suit them.

    There's a real danger that this passes, and everyone pats themselves on the back for a job well done, and politicians get to take a victory lap for "Yay! Nothing to worry about anymore!" while the NSA goes on largely in the same way. A bad bill can be worse than no bill.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2, Disagree) by SubiculumHammer on Thursday April 30 2015, @05:58PM

    by SubiculumHammer (5191) on Thursday April 30 2015, @05:58PM (#177187)

    Not likely. Better something better than nothing better.

  • (Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday April 30 2015, @06:26PM

    by frojack (1554) on Thursday April 30 2015, @06:26PM (#177197) Journal

    A bad bill can be worse than no bill.

    That is only true if you believe the whole shebang would be allowed to die by Sunset on June 1.
    If that's what you believe, prepare for despair.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by MrGuy on Thursday April 30 2015, @07:25PM

      by MrGuy (1007) on Thursday April 30 2015, @07:25PM (#177221)

      That is only true if you believe the whole shebang would be allowed to die by Sunset on June 1.

      Today, because of the Snowden revelations, we know what the government is doing in our name, who they're doing it to, and who was asleep at the switch when they did it. There is a fair amount of (IMO very understandably) outrage about those actions. It makes NSA and government surveillance a matter of active and passionate public debate.

      Passing a bill that people can point to and say "See! Nothing Snowden said is relevant anymore!" takes away the outrage and frustration. It provides a clean PR win to the NSA by allowing it to claim it's "moved on" from programs that people were so upset about. Frankly, there's nothing the NSA would like more than to be able to claim that "we don't do that kind of thing" anymore and be believed. Unless the loopholes are closed, the NSA can keep doing what they're doing, without anyone being upset about it, without public debate, and with relative impunity. Until the next Snowden a decade from now (and you can bet your booty they're doing all they can to make sure "the next Snowden" can't happen).

      I'd frankly rather have the Patriot Act reauthorized and remain a topic of debate and outrage than pretend we fixed it and having the issue go away.

      • (Score: 4, Interesting) by frojack on Thursday April 30 2015, @07:46PM

        by frojack (1554) on Thursday April 30 2015, @07:46PM (#177231) Journal

        Unless the loopholes are closed, the NSA can keep doing what they're doing, without anyone being upset about it, without public debate, and with relative impunity. Until the next Snowden a decade from now (and you can bet your booty they're doing all they can to make sure "the next Snowden" can't happen).
        I'd frankly rather have the Patriot Act reauthorized and remain a topic of debate and outrage than pretend we fixed it and having the issue go away.

        The only way the NSA can compel carriers to funnel all email and phone calls (or the meta data thereof) to the NSA is due to the Patriot act, and specifically section 215.
        There isn't really a "loop hole" the NSA can use to get this stuff any other way. So closing that is worthwhile. Even if that's all that is accomplished. The NSA is supposed to spy on overseas things, and 215 is the major hook upon which they justify spying on Americans. But that requires massive forced cooperation from the carriers.

        Also
        If you believe that allowing your representatives to reauthorize the Patriot act time after time after time is going to keep the "debate" open, you are mistaken.
        You've just acquiesced to it becoming the permanent law of the land. If they extend it it will probably be for another 10 years. The matter will be closed, the debate over.

        --
        No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
        • (Score: 1) by Farkus888 on Thursday April 30 2015, @09:19PM

          by Farkus888 (5159) on Thursday April 30 2015, @09:19PM (#177264)

          I'm with you that reauthorization of the patriot act is not a bright way to try to fix the situation. He seems to think talking about it is the goal and it is the means.

          I would point out that if we simply remove 215, like some people are trying for, it will likely go on with a "They didn't say we couldn't" justification.

          • (Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Thursday April 30 2015, @10:12PM

            by frojack (1554) on Thursday April 30 2015, @10:12PM (#177284) Journal

            "They didn't say we couldn't" justification

            215 is the thing that over-rode prior prohibitions, some dating back to 1947.

            The current bill, as passed by the house is pretty watered down, but Look here [house.gov] starting at about page 24. I haven't seen the senate version yet.

            They are forbidden to do bulk captures, and instead have to provide carriers with a list of phases email addresses etc. The usual loop holes appear to be intact.

            Note that the first link in TFS, was not put in by me, and it actually references the WRONG legislation, from prior years.

            --
            No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
            • (Score: 2) by martyb on Friday May 01 2015, @02:37AM

              by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Friday May 01 2015, @02:37AM (#177351) Journal

              Note that the first link in TFS, was not put in by me, and it actually references the WRONG legislation, from prior years.

              Guilty as charged. I was trying to provide additional background for our non-American readers, and read only a synopsis of the linked Wikipedia article... I won't make *that* mistake again! Please accept my apologies.

              But, thanks to this mistake, I discovered that H.R. 2048 was approved by the House Judiciary Committee by a vote of 25-2 [house.gov]. I have updated the story accordingly.

              --
              Wit is intellect, dancing.
            • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Farkus888 on Friday May 01 2015, @02:41AM

              by Farkus888 (5159) on Friday May 01 2015, @02:41AM (#177353)

              While I hope you are right, I am lacking faith. My opinion is 215 is unconstitutional, which means only a constitutional amendment would actually make it legal. That certainly didn't stop them from a creative interpretation, hard drives aren't papers and smartphones aren't effects, and then just doing what they want.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 30 2015, @11:51PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 30 2015, @11:51PM (#177321)

          The Unpatriotic Act cannot override the highest law of the land. Since what the NSA is doing is completely unconstitutional (regardless of what authoritarian courts might rule), it doesn't matter what the Unpatriotic Act says.