SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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."]
(Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Thursday April 30 2015, @10:12PM
"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
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
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.