First They Came For My Appliances: We Are Here For the Refrigerator Freedom Act
Okay all you naysayers whining shambolic House GOPers aren't doing their job just 'cause they're blocking border solutions, ignoring infrastructure, enabling Ukrainian deaths and barely keeping the government afloat: Listen up. Boldly showcasing their astute priorities, they will fight Monday to liberate your dishwashers, dryers, fridges and other home gizmos from a Marxist "avalanche" of new "Libby Boogyman" rules aimed at keeping the planet from vaporizing into air, and c'mon who cares about that?!
Ever-steadfast in upholding their tradition of chasing fictional ills - Mike 'Election Chicanery' Johnson is now vowing to require proof of citizenship to prevent (brown-skinned) non-citizens from voting even though it's already illegal, also "not a thing" - the GOP-led House Rules Committee meets Monday to discuss six bills to prep them for final votes on the House floor. The six bills are the Stop Unaffordable Dishwasher Standards Act, the Liberty in Laundry Act, the Affordable Air Conditioning Act, the Clothes Dryer Reliability Act, the Hands Off Our Home Appliances Act and the Refrigerator Freedom Act. Yes. They are real. They're in response to a number of Biden regulations or proposals aimed at addressing climate change, part of a $369 billion Inflation Reduction Act that seeks to lower costs, reduce energy use, cut pollutants and move to more green-energy practices.
To Republicans, however, they're aimed at letting tyrants "control everything Americans are able to do on a day-to-day basis," part of an insidious plot to allow "others" to come for their stuff, their choices and their God-given rights, evidently including the right to get a back-alley abortion with a coat hanger. (One sage: "REPUBLICANS: 'Keep gubmint OUT of our toasters and dish washers!' ALSO REPUBLICANS: 'We need surveillance cameras inside every cha-cha so we can keep an eye on what women are doing!'") Thus did Arizona's Rep. Debbie Lesko, declaring she is "proud (to) stand on the side of choice for American consumers," devise the Hands Off Our Home Appliances Act to prohibit "federal bureaucrats" from issuing an aforementioned "avalanche" of new energy standards "not technologically feasible and economically justified."
In March, Iowa's Rep.Mariannette Miller-Meeks echoed her, introducing and eventually passing theRefrigerator Freedom Act to prohibit the same offenses - now "not cost-effective or technologically feasible" - because Biden has "done nothing but implement outrageous regulations" that only limit choice, increase prices, disenfranchise toilets and blenders, and move us toward dictatorship. MAGA-ites, of course, applaud these red-meat efforts to rescue heat pumps, gas stoves, washing machines, showers and air fryers from domination. "Finally, following American and not Globalist priorities," said one. "I am sick and tired of the government telling us what we can and cannot buy and use." And after 11 GOP-run states sued over some of the changes, a judge dismissed the rules as "arbitrary and capricious."
That could also apply to a House focused on fighting to be able to buy a $7 toaster even if, okay, so it may burn your house down but FREEDUMB! Of course, confronting issues like national security or infrastructure require actual, unflashy, conciliatory, negotiating, attention-to-detail legislative work, and they're barely able to co-exist with their colleagues, never mind opponents, and anyway it's probably about time for another two-week recess, so let's go with hair dryers and ceiling fans. Along with the petty stupidity is the economic irony: Most appliances are made in China, so they're protecting Chinese companies from U.S. regulations, and for things made here, they're ensuring big business can be left alone to make over-priced, planet-killing, deliberately-soon-obsolete crap. Your tax dollars at work!
Predictably, the cognitive dissonance drew its share of mockery, with Digby noting, "We all know the GOP likes to focus on kitchen table issues, but this is ridiculous." Others argued that, "Insurrectionists are now GOP Congresspersons" and that, thanks in part to such diversionary tomfoolery, "The GOP has Ukrainian blood on their hands." "First they came for my appliances," one intoned. "I was not an appliance, so I said nothing." Another suggested a key addition to the GOP agenda: a "Stop Wasting Our Time on Meaningless Legislation Act." There were also triumphant stories of deliverance born of the GOP's hard and noble work. "In honor of the Refrigerator Freedom Act, I just opened my front door and set my newly liberated Frigidaire free," one reported. "Needless to say, it's running."
UK Youth, Experts Occupy Coal-Sponsored Science Museum Gallery
A few dozen protesters from Youth Action for Climate Justice and Scientists for Extinction Rebellion this weekend occupied a new climate gallery at the Science Museum in London that is sponsored by the Indian coal and weapons giant Adani.
"To have a coal company sponsoring an exhibition on the future of energy is blatantly deceiving," Anya, a young person who occupied the Energy Revolution gallery, said in a statement. "Through this sponsorship deal, the Science Museum is helping Adani attach itself to the image of a positive and sustainable future when in reality it is a coal giant, weapons manufacturer, and genocide supporter. It's plain wrong for the Science Museum to be deceiving visitors, including young people like me, when it comes to the climate crisis."
The occupation came after over 150 people protested at the museum shortly before the gallery's opening last month. In response, an Adani representative claimed that the sponsorship—which has been condemned by climate action advocates since it was announced three years ago—was part of the company's effort to participate in the global energy transition. Ian Blatchford, director and chief executive of the Science Museum Group, defended the firm's involvement.
However, their comments didn't satisfy critics who participated in the weekend occupation. As Real Mediareported:
On Friday evening the activists smuggled in balloons and black paper which they used to create a large art piece—a mound of black coal—in the centre of the gallery. Their plan was to interact with the public on Saturday after their first night of occupation, including a People's Assembly to discuss the controversial sponsorship in the afternoon.
Police were called, but no arrests were made. However, perhaps embarrassed by the presence of the protest and their message about the climate-wrecking sponsors, the museum decided to prevent access to the gallery for the whole of Saturday, although supporters did come with more banners which they held near the entrance.
The protesters remained in the museum overnight on Saturday and ended their action on Sunday.
"It's not just Adani's brand that the Science Museum is greenwashing, they're also allowing the oil and gas giants BP and Equinor to sponsor their exhibits, disregarding the fact that these companies continue to expand fossil fuel production against the warnings of climate scientists," noted Aaron Thierry, one of the scientists who occupied the gallery.
"The latest science has shown we must leave the majority of fossil fuels unburned to prevent catastrophic changes to our climate," Thierry stressed. "That an institution like the Science Museum is working with such rouge companies is a disgrace. The museum's management needs to follow the example of Britain's other leading cultural institutions and drop all ties to the fossil fuel industry."
The young people and scientists were joined by naturalist and television presenter Chris Packham, who gave a speech Friday night.
"For me, science is the art of understanding truth and beauty and a lot of that beauty lies in the natural world. Science tells us that the fossil fuel industry is responsible for the accelerating destruction of our natural world," said Packham. "The Science Museum is a place to spark imagination, to provide answers but also to encourage us to ask questions."
"The question I'm asking today is a big one, 'Why on Earth are we allowing a destructive industry to sponsor an educational exhibition whilst simultaneously setting fire to young people's futures?'" he continued. "This is beyond greenwash—it's grotesque."
Packham emphasized that "we urgently need an 'Energy Revolution' to steer us away from the course of planetary destruction on which we are heading. We need a rapid, just transition to renewables—that revolution means an end to coal, and starts with the young people and scientists occupying this space this evening. Science tells us the truth, and the truth is that we must change."
'Let Them Eat GDP Reports': 44 Million Americans Are Food Insecure
A U.S. anti-hunger group marked April Fools' Day on Monday with a snarky statement suggesting that hungry Americans "can eat positive economic statistics about the soaring stock market or the growing gross domestic product."
"Let them eat GDP reports," Hunger Free America declared of the 44 million Americans—including 13 million children—who live in food insecure households, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
GDP is the market value of all the finished goods and services produced in a country over a certain time period. Critics have long argued against using it as the premier indicator of how a nation is doing.
"The old school way of the elites fighting hunger was to say, 'let them eat cake,'" said Hunger Free America CEO Joel Berg. "But the more modern approach is to say, 'let them eat a report of the nation's growing GDP, although the report offers empty calories.'"
"By focusing mostly on economic statistics that benefit mostly the wealthy—like stock indexes—the nation's political and media elites blithely overlook that hard evidence that the economy is still structurally unsound for large swaths of the public, and then those same elites are flummoxed as to why the public tells pollsters they are still not satisfied with the economy," Berg explained.
"The country's impoverished multitudes can now get all they can eat—assuming they can digest paper report pages."
"But the good news is that, none of that matters now, because truckloads of positive economic reports are being shipped to food banks, soup kitchens, and food pantries nationwide, and the country's impoverished multitudes can now get all they can eat—assuming they can digest paper report pages and cardboard report covers, and don't mind a bit of poisonous ink," he quipped.
While inflation has eased in the United States over the past two years in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, corporations have engaged in price gouging that has kept costs high for Americans, everywhere from gas pumps to grocery stores to fast food restaurants.
"It's one thing for corporations to pass reasonable increased costs to consumers. It's another for them to line their coffers by exploiting Americans who are just trying to get by," the Groundwork Collaborative's Liz Pancotti said in January, as the group released a related report. "It's time to rein in corporate price gouging—or families will continue to pay the price."
Data released last month by the Federal Reserve shows that the top 1% of Americans are the richest they have ever been, with a collective $44.6 trillion in wealth, a record largely driven by the stock market. President Joe Biden and some progressive Democratic lawmakers recently renewed calls for wealth taxes, but such proposals are not expected to pass the divided Congress.
Meanwhile, the federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour, and has been so since 2009. Although state policymakers have taken action to raise pay for some or all workers, national legislation to boost wages also has not been able to get through Congress.
Major Media Outlets Urge Biden, Trump to Commit to 2024 Debates
After Tuesday previews by CNN and The New York Times, a dozen major U.S. news outlets on Sunday called on Democratic President Joe Biden, who is seeking reelection, and former President Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, to agree now to debate each other.
Although the presidential primary season is ongoing, the two historically unpopular candidates have already secured enough delegates to receive their parties' nominations at the conventions this summer. The nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) last year announced the date, time, and location of three debates scheduled for September and October.
"With the contours of the 2024 general election now coming into clear focus, we—the undersigned national news organizations—urge the presumptive presidential nominees to publicly commit to participating in general election debates before November's election," says the joint letter signed by ABC News, The Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, C-SPAN, Fox News, NewsNation, NBC News, Noticias Univision, NPR, PBS NewsHour, and USA Today.
"General election debates have a rich tradition in our American democracy, having played a vital role in every presidential election of the past 50 years."
"General election debates have a rich tradition in our American democracy, having played a vital role in every presidential election of the past 50 years, dating to 1976," they wrote. "In each of those elections, tens of millions have tuned in to watch the candidates debating side by side, in a competition of ideas for the votes of American citizens."
The news organizations noted that "though it is too early for invitations to be extended to any candidates, it is not too early for candidates who expect to meet the eligibility criteria to publicly state their support for—and their intention to participate in—the commission's debates planned for this fall."
"If there is one thing Americans can agree on during this polarized time, it is that the stakes of this election are exceptionally high," the letter concludes. "Amidst that backdrop, there is simply no substitute for the candidates debating with each other, and before the American people, their visions for the future of our nation."
In a Thursday letter to CPD leaders acknowledging the media organizations' call, Trump's campaign wrote that "the commission must move up the timetable of its proposed 2024 debates to ensure more Americans have a full chance to see the candidates before they start voting, and we would argue for adding more debates in addition to those on the currently proposed schedule."
"We have already indicated President Trump is willing to debate anytime, anyplace, anywhere—and the time to start these debates is now," the campaign letter adds. This, despite the Republican National Committee's 2022 withdrawal from the CPD.
At a Saturday rally in Schnecksville, Pennsylvania, Trump stood next to a podium with a sign that said "anytime, anywhere, anyplace" and renewed his call for Biden to debate him. The twice-impeached former president—who faces four ongoing criminal cases—has a track record of defying debate rules.
As ABC Newsdetailed Sunday:
Biden has mostly avoided commenting publicly on engaging in debate with Trump. Asked following his State of the Union address in March if he would commit to one, Biden remarked to ABC News: "It depends on his behavior."
"Well, if I were him, I'd want to debate me too," Biden said earlier in March, after Trump challenged him to debate "anytime, anywhere, anyplace."
"He's got nothing else to do," Biden added.
The Times reported earlier this week that "the Biden campaign has not ruled out agreeing to the debates, according to a person with direct knowledge of the discussions, who requested anonymity to share details intended to be private. But the campaign does not see an advantage to publicly committing to participate this early in the year, the person said."
Trump declined to participate in the Republican primary debates this cycle and Democrats didn't hold any, despite protests from longshot candidates. In 2020, there were only two presidential debates; a third was canceled after Trump tested positive for Covid-19 and refused to shift to a remote format.
In February, Ralph Nader, who has run for president as an Independent, suggested holding presidential debates in major cities and swing states, writing in a Common Dreams opinion piece that "unlike the one-shoe-fits-all model of the CPD, this proposal would provide a greater variety of debate formats and reflect national issues by the moderators but also regional issues."
"The proverbial named 'empty seat' for no-show candidates would be visible to millions of TV viewers if an invited candidate declined to participate," he argued. "All that is needed to make these debates happen is for the mayor and city council in each city to establish a representative host committee to organize the details of when, where, and how these debates are to be planned."
Montanans Launch Push to Get Abortion Rights on November Ballot
As abortion continues to dominate this year's state and federal political contests, Montanans Securing Reproductive Rights on Tuesday launched a signature collection drive to get a citizen-initiated state constitutional amendment on the November ballot.
Since the right-wing U.S. Supreme Court reversedRoe v. Wade with Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization nearly two years ago, Republican state lawmakers have ramped up efforts to further restrict abortion care—and voters, including residents of red states, have responded by protecting reproductive freedom when weighing in on related ballot measures.
With little hope that the divided Congress will restore nationwide abortion rights, ballot initiatives for the 2024 cycle are ongoing in various states, from Arizona and Florida to Montana, where "a yes vote on Ballot Issue #14 will keep the government out of our personal lives," as the Montanans Securing Reproductive Rights website states.
"This is an exciting opportunity to secure our rights for generations to come. Now is the time to ensure power remains in the hands of the people of Montana, so everyone has the freedom to prevent, continue, or end a pregnancy should they choose," the site adds. "Politicians have no business controlling our bodies and our futures."
After a legal battle with Republican state Attorney General Austin Knudsen, the ballot language is:
CI-128 would amend the Montana Constitution to expressly provide a right to make and carry out decisions about one's own pregnancy, including the right to abortion. It would prohibit the government from denying or burdening the right to abortion before fetal viability. It would also prohibit the government from denying or burdening access to an abortion when a treating healthcare professional determines it is medically indicated to protect the pregnant patient's life or health. CI-128 prevents the government from penalizing patients, healthcare providers, or anyone who assists someone in exercising their right to make and carry out voluntary decisions about their pregnancy.
Montana currently allows abortion care up until fetal viability. In response to a legal challenge from Planned Parenthood of Montana (PPMT), a trial judge in February struck down three laws passed by the Republican-controlled state Legislature in 2021: a 20-week ban, restrictions on medication abortions, and a rule that providers must offer patients an ultrasound.
"We are relieved that Montanans will no longer live with the threat of these harmful restrictions taking effect. But make no mistake, our fight continues," PPMT president and CEO Martha Fuller said at the time. "For years anti-abortion politicians at all levels of government have made banning abortion their number one priority, despite the current protection held in our state constitution."
"During the 2023 Montana legislative session, an onslaught of anti-abortion bills was introduced, passed, and signed into law, and PPMT is working hard to beat back these attacks and more," Fuller continued. "We will never stop working to ensure that all Montanans and those who are forced to travel here for care can access the care they need."
In addition to Planned Parenthood, Montanans Securing Reproductive Rights is a campaign by the ACLU of Montana, the Fairness Project, and Forward Montana. The coalition now needs to collect 60,000 signatures by June 21.
"Anti-abortion extremists have tried to interfere in Montanans' personal healthcare choices again and again. That's totally unacceptable—Montanans deserve to make their own decisions about reproductive care, not have politicians decide for them," the Fairness Project executive director Kelly Hall said Tuesday.
"The Fairness Project is proud and excited to be supporting Montanans Securing Reproductive Rights in their campaign to pass CI-128, especially at a time when abortion rights are under attack," Hall added. "With 2024 shaping up to be the biggest year ever for abortion on the ballot, it is critical that Montanans can make their voices heard on this issue."
Aid Coalition Says Gaza Cease-Fire Needed to Avert 'Catastrophic' Middle East War
A coalition of more than a dozen humanitarian groups on Tuesday stressed the need for an immediate cease-fire in the Gaza Strip following Iran's retaliatory attack on Israel, which has been waging a devastating war on the Palestinian enclave for more than six months.
The humanitarian groups—including International Rescue Committee, Norwegian Refugee Council, Save the Children, and ActionAid—said in a joint statement that "recent escalations in the Middle East are unprecedented and risk regional conflagration, threatening the lives of millions of civilians."
"To avoid the security situation spiraling out of control, all efforts must be made to ensure de-escalation through political and diplomatic means alone," the statement reads. "A regional conflict would be catastrophic for the Middle East, where millions are already affected by existing crises due to conflict, displacement, poverty, and climate change."
The groups argued that escalating tensions between Israel and Iran "are closely linked to the ongoing conflict in Gaza," underscoring the need for "an immediate and permanent cease-fire" to "prevent further human suffering and to de-escalate tensions in the region."
"This latest round of violence was predictably fueled by decades of impunity for state violations of a most fundamental global rule: the prohibition on the use of force."
The statement comes days after Iran launched hundreds of drones and missiles at Israel over the weekend in response to the Israeli military's bombing of Tehran's consulate in the capital of Syria earlier this month—an attack that killed diplomats and a senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander.
United Nations experts said Tuesday that both Israel's consulate attack and Iran's retaliation violated international law. The experts also said an Israeli military response to Iran's missile and drone attack would be illegal.
"This latest round of violence was predictably fueled by decades of impunity for state violations of a most fundamental global rule: the prohibition on the use of force," the experts said.
The broader Middle East conflict stemming from Israel's assault on the Gaza Strip now involves at least 16 countries, and Iran's retaliation against Israel led war hawks in the U.S. to call for further escalation—including a direct U.S. attack on Iran.
Israel, for its part, has pledged to "exact a price from Iran" in response to the firing of missiles and drones, most of which were intercepted with U.S. help.
The humanitarian coalition warned Tuesday that any further military exchanges would risk disaster and implored all parties involved to "immediately work towards de-escalation."
"Drawing on our extensive collective experience in the region, we understand that crises in the Middle East often have far-reaching consequences beyond its borders," the groups said. "A regional conflict would likely result in significant global ramifications, including forced displacement and migration, disruptions to global supply chains, and impacts on energy supplies."
'Shameful': Columbia Greenlights Police Crackdown on Anti-War Encampment
Even after dozens of students were arrested, hundreds "rushed to take the place of their classmates" and continued the protest.
The arrests of dozens of Columbia University and Barnard College students on Thursday "galvanized" other supporters of Palestinian rights on the campuses, as hundreds of students occupied the school's western lawn after New York City police filled at least two buses with protesters who had been detained for setting up an encampment.
"Disclose, divest, we will not stop, we will not rest," chanted hundreds of students as they marched around the area where organizers had set up a tent encampment early Wednesday morning.
Columbia President Minouche Shafik informed the campus community on Thursday that she had authorized the police to clear the encampment.
As it has been in the past, the school has become a center of anti-war protests—and crackdowns by school officials and the police—since Israel began its bombardment of Gaza in October.
Pro-Palestinian students and alumni have demanded that Columbia divest from companies that profit from Israel's apartheid policies in the occupied Palestinian territories and cancel its dual degree program with Tel Aviv University.
In response to pro-Palestinian demonstrations, Columbia in November suspended the campus chapters of Jewish Voice for Peace and Students for Justice in Palestine—an action that pushed the New York Civil Liberties Union and Palestine Legal to file a lawsuit on behalf of the students last month.
On Thursday, police and Columbia employees took down about 50 tents that had been up for more than a day and disposed of them in trash cans and alleyways—but The New York Times reported later that "demonstrators repitched a couple of tents, and ... recovered the main signage from the encampment as well," while hundreds of students were "still gathered and chanting on the south side of the grass."
The arrests came a day after Shafik testified before the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce about antisemitism on campus.
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), whose daughter, Isra Hirsi, was among the Barnard students who were suspended on Thursday for participating in the encampment protest, questioned Shafik about whether antisemitic protests have actually taken place at Columbia, prompting the president to say there have not.
"There has been a rise in targeting and harassment against anti-war protesters, because it's been pro-war and anti-war protesters is what it seems, like, correct?" asked Omar.
"Correct," replied Shafik.
On Thursday, Omar posted on social media two images of protesters at Columbia: one from the encampment this week, and one from 1968, when students protested the U.S. war in Vietnam.
New York City Council member Tiffany Cabán was among those who condemned the university's crackdown on the protests on Thursday.
"Suspending and arresting Columbia/Barnard student activists and disbanding student organizations—including Jewish students and organizations—doesn't combat antisemitism or increase safety," said Cabán. "All it does is punish and intimidate those who believe in human rights for Palestinians. Shameful."
'McCarthyism Is Alive and Well': Google Fires 28 for Protesting Israel Contract
"These mass, illegal firings will not stop us," said organizers. "Make no mistake, we will continue organizing until the company drops Project Nimbus and stops powering this genocide."
The peace coalition No Tech for Apartheid accused Google of a "flagrant act of retaliation" late Wednesday night as the Silicon Valley giant announced it had fired 28 workers over protests against its cloud services contract with the Israeli government.
The firings came after Google organizers held two 10-hour sit-ins at the company's offices in Sunnyvale, California and New York City, demanding the termination of Project Nimbus, a $1.2 billion contract under which Google and Amazon provide cloud infrastructure and data services for Israel—without any oversight regarding whether the Israel Defense Forces uses the services in its occupation of Palestinian territories and bombardment of Gaza.
Workers have denounced Project Nimbus since it was announced in 2021, but Israel's killing of at least 33,970 Palestinians in Gaza since October and its intentional starvation of civilians led employees to escalate their protests.
No Tech for Apartheid said in a statement that Google officials called the police to both offices to arrest nine protesters—dubbed the Nimbus Nine—on Tuesday morning, before utilizing "a dragnet of in-office surveillance" to fire nearly two dozen other employees on Wednesday.
"They punished all of the workers they could associate with this action in wholesale firings," said the coalition, which includes Jewish Voice for Peace and MPower Change, a Muslim-led anti-war group.
Google accused the workers of "bullying," "harassment," defacing property, and physically impeding other employees—allegations No Tech for Apartheid rejected as it noted organizers "have yet to hear from a single executive about" their concerns over Google's collaboration with Israel.
"This excuse to avoid confronting us and our concerns directly, and attempt to justify its illegal, retaliatory firings, is a lie," said the workers. "Even the workers who were participating in a peaceful sit-in and refusing to leave did not damage property or threaten other workers. Instead they received an overwhelmingly positive response and shows of support."
The organizers staged the sit-ins on the heels of reporting in Time magazine about new negotiations between Google and the Israeli government regarding further potential tech contracts.
Kate J. Sim, a child safety policy adviser at Google who said she was among those fired this week, said the terminations show "how terrified [executives] are of worker power."
Google employees have a history of harnessing worker power to change policies at the company. In 2018, Google terminated a deal with the U.S. Defense Department to develop drone and artificial intelligence (AI) technology through a contract called Project Maven. The decision followed the resignations of several employees and the condemnation of thousands of workers.
Calling Google CEO Sundar Pichai and Google Cloud CEO Thomas Kurian "genocide profiteers," No Tech for Apartheid said Wednesday that they will not stop demonstrating against Project Nimbus until they get a similar result.
"The truth is clear: Google is terrified of us," said the group. "They are terrified of workers coming together and calling for accountability and transparency from our bosses... The corporation is trying to downplay and discredit our power.
"These mass, illegal firings will not stop us," No Tech for Apartheid added. "On the contrary, they only serve as further fuel for the growth of this movement. Make no mistake, we will continue organizing until the company drops Project Nimbus and stops powering this genocide."
Amid Spying Fight, House Passes Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act
"As FANFSA and the 702 reauthorization move to the Senate, lawmakers in that chamber need to take a stand for the rights of people in the United States," said one advocate.
While applauding the U.S. House of Representatives' bipartisan passage of a bill to ensure that "law enforcement and intelligence agencies can't do an end-run around the Constitution by buying information from data brokers" on Wednesday, privacy advocates highlighted that Congress is trying to extend and expand a long-abused government spying program.
The House voted 219-199 for Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act (FANFSA), which won support from 96 Democrats and 123 Republicans, including the lead sponsor, Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio). Named for the constitutional amendment that protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, H.R. 4639 would close what campaigners call the data broker loophole.
"The privacy violations that flow from law enforcement entities circumventing the Fourth Amendment undermine civil liberties, free expression, and our ability to control what happens to our data," said Free Press Action policy counsel Jenna Ruddock. "These impacts affect everyone who uses digital platforms that extract our personal information any time we open a browser or visit social media and other websites—even when we go to events like demonstrations and other places with our phones revealing our locations."
"We're grateful that the House passed these vital and popular protections," she added. "The bill would prevent flagrant abuses of our privacy by government authorities in league with unscrupulous third-party data brokers. Making this legislation into law with Senate passage too would be a decisive and long-overdue action against government misuse of this clandestine business sector that traffics in our personal data for profit."
Wednesday's vote followed the House sending the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act to the Senate. H.R. 7888 would reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which allows for warrantless spying on noncitizens abroad but also sweeps up Americans' data.
The House notably included an amendment forcing a wide range of individuals and businesses to cooperate with government spying operations but rejected an amendment that would have added a warrant requirement to the bill, which the Senate could vote on as soon as Thursday.
Noting those decisions on the FISA reauthorization legislation, Ruddock stressed that "today's vote is a victory but follows a recent loss and ongoing threat as that Section 702 bill moves to the Senate this week too."
"As FANFSA and the 702 reauthorization move to the Senate, lawmakers in that chamber need to take a stand for the rights of people in the United States," she argued. "That means passing FANFSA and reforming Section 702 authority—and prioritizing everyone's First and Fourth Amendment rights."
Jeramie Scott, senior counsel and director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center's Project on Surveillance Oversight, also praised the House's FANFSA passage on Wednesday.
"The passage of the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale underscores the extent to which reining in abusive warrantless surveillance is a bipartisan issue," Scott said. "We urge the Senate to take up this measure and close the data broker loophole."
Kia Hamadanchy, senior policy counsel at ACLU, similarly said Wednesday that "the bipartisan passage of this bill is a flashing warning sign to the government that if it wants our data, it must get a warrant."
Hamadanchy added that "we hope this vote puts a fire under the Senate to protect their constituents and rein in the government's warrantless surveillance of Americans, once and for all."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a critic of the pending 702 bill and FANFSA's lead sponsor in the upper chamber, called the the House's Wednesday vote "a huge win for privacy" and said that "now it's time for the Senate to follow suit."