

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

According to information provided to the New York Times by unnamed "senior White House officials," the Obama administration is proposing to end the NSA's mass collection of phone records by instead requesting them from phone companies on an individual, court-approved basis. The companies would not be required to retain records longer than they already do.
Though little information has yet to be released, many critics of the NSA's vast dragnet operations say the proposal clearly does not go far enough.
"The administration doesn't seem to be contemplating new limits on the agency's authority to retain, analyze or disseminate the records it collects," writes Jameel Jaffer, director of the National Security Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. "And it isn't proposing to end bulk collection of all records - just the bulk collection of phone records."
"Given all the various ways that the NSA has overreached, piecemeal change is not enough," writes Cindy Cohn and Mark M. Jaycox of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Noting that an existing bill--the "USA Freedom Act" by Judiciary Committee chairs Sen. Patrick Leahy and Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner--does much of what Obama proposed and more, Cohn and Jaycox say, instead of paltry legislation, "we urge the Administration to simply decide that it will stop misusing section 215 of the Patriot Act and section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act and Executive Order 12333 and whatever else it is secretly relying on to stop mass spying."
Also today, the leaders of the House Intelligence Committee, Reps Mike Rogers (D-Mich.) and Dutch Ruppersberger (R-Md.), announced a bill titled the "End Bulk Collection Act."
Given an advance copy of the House proposal, the Guardian's Trevor Timm notes that the law effectively expands NSA's surveillance power. "The devil is in the details," he writes, adding that "when it comes to the National Security Agency's unique ability to twist and distort the English language, the devil tends to wrap his horns around every word."
Timm explains:
A judge would reportedly not have to approve the collection beforehand, and the language suggests the government could obtain the phone records on citizens at least two "hops" away from the suspect, meaning if you talked to someone who talked to a suspect, your records could be searched by the NSA. Coupled with the expanded "foreign power" language, this kind of law coming out of Congress could, arguably, allow the NSA to analyze more data of innocent Americans than it could before.
Michelle Richardson, legislative counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union, adds that the House committee proposal "uses reform momentum as a pretext for expanding government power."
"The bill's modest improvements to the phone records program are not worth demolishing the important judicial role in overseeing these programs," Richardson adds.
Despite these weaknesses, critics agree that the public effort to reign in government surveillance is a clear vindication of NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.
As Jaffer notes, "the president is acknowledging that a surveillance program endorsed by all three branches of government, and in place for more than a decade, has not been able to survive public scrutiny."
"The question now is whether the administration's proposal with respect to the phone-records program signals a broader recognition that many of the NSA's surveillance activities lack democratic legitimacy," he adds.
_____________________
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

According to information provided to the New York Times by unnamed "senior White House officials," the Obama administration is proposing to end the NSA's mass collection of phone records by instead requesting them from phone companies on an individual, court-approved basis. The companies would not be required to retain records longer than they already do.
Though little information has yet to be released, many critics of the NSA's vast dragnet operations say the proposal clearly does not go far enough.
"The administration doesn't seem to be contemplating new limits on the agency's authority to retain, analyze or disseminate the records it collects," writes Jameel Jaffer, director of the National Security Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. "And it isn't proposing to end bulk collection of all records - just the bulk collection of phone records."
"Given all the various ways that the NSA has overreached, piecemeal change is not enough," writes Cindy Cohn and Mark M. Jaycox of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Noting that an existing bill--the "USA Freedom Act" by Judiciary Committee chairs Sen. Patrick Leahy and Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner--does much of what Obama proposed and more, Cohn and Jaycox say, instead of paltry legislation, "we urge the Administration to simply decide that it will stop misusing section 215 of the Patriot Act and section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act and Executive Order 12333 and whatever else it is secretly relying on to stop mass spying."
Also today, the leaders of the House Intelligence Committee, Reps Mike Rogers (D-Mich.) and Dutch Ruppersberger (R-Md.), announced a bill titled the "End Bulk Collection Act."
Given an advance copy of the House proposal, the Guardian's Trevor Timm notes that the law effectively expands NSA's surveillance power. "The devil is in the details," he writes, adding that "when it comes to the National Security Agency's unique ability to twist and distort the English language, the devil tends to wrap his horns around every word."
Timm explains:
A judge would reportedly not have to approve the collection beforehand, and the language suggests the government could obtain the phone records on citizens at least two "hops" away from the suspect, meaning if you talked to someone who talked to a suspect, your records could be searched by the NSA. Coupled with the expanded "foreign power" language, this kind of law coming out of Congress could, arguably, allow the NSA to analyze more data of innocent Americans than it could before.
Michelle Richardson, legislative counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union, adds that the House committee proposal "uses reform momentum as a pretext for expanding government power."
"The bill's modest improvements to the phone records program are not worth demolishing the important judicial role in overseeing these programs," Richardson adds.
Despite these weaknesses, critics agree that the public effort to reign in government surveillance is a clear vindication of NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.
As Jaffer notes, "the president is acknowledging that a surveillance program endorsed by all three branches of government, and in place for more than a decade, has not been able to survive public scrutiny."
"The question now is whether the administration's proposal with respect to the phone-records program signals a broader recognition that many of the NSA's surveillance activities lack democratic legitimacy," he adds.
_____________________

According to information provided to the New York Times by unnamed "senior White House officials," the Obama administration is proposing to end the NSA's mass collection of phone records by instead requesting them from phone companies on an individual, court-approved basis. The companies would not be required to retain records longer than they already do.
Though little information has yet to be released, many critics of the NSA's vast dragnet operations say the proposal clearly does not go far enough.
"The administration doesn't seem to be contemplating new limits on the agency's authority to retain, analyze or disseminate the records it collects," writes Jameel Jaffer, director of the National Security Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. "And it isn't proposing to end bulk collection of all records - just the bulk collection of phone records."
"Given all the various ways that the NSA has overreached, piecemeal change is not enough," writes Cindy Cohn and Mark M. Jaycox of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Noting that an existing bill--the "USA Freedom Act" by Judiciary Committee chairs Sen. Patrick Leahy and Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner--does much of what Obama proposed and more, Cohn and Jaycox say, instead of paltry legislation, "we urge the Administration to simply decide that it will stop misusing section 215 of the Patriot Act and section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act and Executive Order 12333 and whatever else it is secretly relying on to stop mass spying."
Also today, the leaders of the House Intelligence Committee, Reps Mike Rogers (D-Mich.) and Dutch Ruppersberger (R-Md.), announced a bill titled the "End Bulk Collection Act."
Given an advance copy of the House proposal, the Guardian's Trevor Timm notes that the law effectively expands NSA's surveillance power. "The devil is in the details," he writes, adding that "when it comes to the National Security Agency's unique ability to twist and distort the English language, the devil tends to wrap his horns around every word."
Timm explains:
A judge would reportedly not have to approve the collection beforehand, and the language suggests the government could obtain the phone records on citizens at least two "hops" away from the suspect, meaning if you talked to someone who talked to a suspect, your records could be searched by the NSA. Coupled with the expanded "foreign power" language, this kind of law coming out of Congress could, arguably, allow the NSA to analyze more data of innocent Americans than it could before.
Michelle Richardson, legislative counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union, adds that the House committee proposal "uses reform momentum as a pretext for expanding government power."
"The bill's modest improvements to the phone records program are not worth demolishing the important judicial role in overseeing these programs," Richardson adds.
Despite these weaknesses, critics agree that the public effort to reign in government surveillance is a clear vindication of NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.
As Jaffer notes, "the president is acknowledging that a surveillance program endorsed by all three branches of government, and in place for more than a decade, has not been able to survive public scrutiny."
"The question now is whether the administration's proposal with respect to the phone-records program signals a broader recognition that many of the NSA's surveillance activities lack democratic legitimacy," he adds.
_____________________