SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Civil Liberties Groups Decry Neutering of NSA Reform Bill
Following a gutting from House leaders, groups say USA Freedom Act has strayed too far from initial goal to end bulk spying.
May 21, 2014
Civil liberties organizations say they can no longer support a National Security Agency reform bill--the USA Freedom Act--after the House significantly weakened it to allow for the possibility of continued bulk surveillance, following pressure from the Obama administration.
The amendments followed negotiations and talks between the Obama administration and House leaders.
"[W]e cannot in good conscience support this weakened version of the bill, where key reforms--especially those intended to end bulk collection and increase transparency--have been substantially watered down," said Kevin Bankston, policy director of the New America Foundation's Open Technology Institute, in a statement released Tuesday.
"The Electronic Frontier Foundation cannot support a bill that doesn't achieve the goal of ending mass spying," the organization declared in a statement.
The new version of the bill (pdf) includes a more expansive definition of the "specific selection term," which determines who the government is allowed to spy on by compelling phone companies to turn over their records.
"Less than a week ago, the definition was simply 'a term used to uniquely describe a person, entity, or account,'" the EFF explains. "The new version not only adds the undefined words 'address' and 'device,' but makes the list of potential selection terms open-ended by using the term 'such as.'"
"Put another way, it may ban 'bulk' collection of all records of a particular kind, but still allow for 'bulky' collection impacting the privacy of millions of people," said Robyn Greene, policy counsel for the Open Technology Institute, in a statement.
The new bill also lowers the bar on requirements for what the telecom industry must report to the public about records requests from the government.
"Those transparency reporting provisions have been weakened to the point that they are almost identical to what the Justice Department has already agreed to let the companies report," said Bankston.
"The bill has been watered down far, far down even from the compromise that was struck when the bill was voted out of committee," said Patrick Toomey of the American Civil Liberties Union, according to the Huffington Post. "While it represents a slight improvement from the status quo, it isn't the reform bill that Americans deserve."
The now "watered down" USA Freedom Act heads to the House floor this week.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
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 |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare is the editor of Workday Magazine and a contributing editor for In These Times. She is a former Staff Writer at Common Dreams. She comes from a background in independent journalism for publications including The Intercept, The Nation, and Tom Dispatch.
Civil liberties organizations say they can no longer support a National Security Agency reform bill--the USA Freedom Act--after the House significantly weakened it to allow for the possibility of continued bulk surveillance, following pressure from the Obama administration.
The amendments followed negotiations and talks between the Obama administration and House leaders.
"[W]e cannot in good conscience support this weakened version of the bill, where key reforms--especially those intended to end bulk collection and increase transparency--have been substantially watered down," said Kevin Bankston, policy director of the New America Foundation's Open Technology Institute, in a statement released Tuesday.
"The Electronic Frontier Foundation cannot support a bill that doesn't achieve the goal of ending mass spying," the organization declared in a statement.
The new version of the bill (pdf) includes a more expansive definition of the "specific selection term," which determines who the government is allowed to spy on by compelling phone companies to turn over their records.
"Less than a week ago, the definition was simply 'a term used to uniquely describe a person, entity, or account,'" the EFF explains. "The new version not only adds the undefined words 'address' and 'device,' but makes the list of potential selection terms open-ended by using the term 'such as.'"
"Put another way, it may ban 'bulk' collection of all records of a particular kind, but still allow for 'bulky' collection impacting the privacy of millions of people," said Robyn Greene, policy counsel for the Open Technology Institute, in a statement.
The new bill also lowers the bar on requirements for what the telecom industry must report to the public about records requests from the government.
"Those transparency reporting provisions have been weakened to the point that they are almost identical to what the Justice Department has already agreed to let the companies report," said Bankston.
"The bill has been watered down far, far down even from the compromise that was struck when the bill was voted out of committee," said Patrick Toomey of the American Civil Liberties Union, according to the Huffington Post. "While it represents a slight improvement from the status quo, it isn't the reform bill that Americans deserve."
The now "watered down" USA Freedom Act heads to the House floor this week.
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare is the editor of Workday Magazine and a contributing editor for In These Times. She is a former Staff Writer at Common Dreams. She comes from a background in independent journalism for publications including The Intercept, The Nation, and Tom Dispatch.
Civil liberties organizations say they can no longer support a National Security Agency reform bill--the USA Freedom Act--after the House significantly weakened it to allow for the possibility of continued bulk surveillance, following pressure from the Obama administration.
The amendments followed negotiations and talks between the Obama administration and House leaders.
"[W]e cannot in good conscience support this weakened version of the bill, where key reforms--especially those intended to end bulk collection and increase transparency--have been substantially watered down," said Kevin Bankston, policy director of the New America Foundation's Open Technology Institute, in a statement released Tuesday.
"The Electronic Frontier Foundation cannot support a bill that doesn't achieve the goal of ending mass spying," the organization declared in a statement.
The new version of the bill (pdf) includes a more expansive definition of the "specific selection term," which determines who the government is allowed to spy on by compelling phone companies to turn over their records.
"Less than a week ago, the definition was simply 'a term used to uniquely describe a person, entity, or account,'" the EFF explains. "The new version not only adds the undefined words 'address' and 'device,' but makes the list of potential selection terms open-ended by using the term 'such as.'"
"Put another way, it may ban 'bulk' collection of all records of a particular kind, but still allow for 'bulky' collection impacting the privacy of millions of people," said Robyn Greene, policy counsel for the Open Technology Institute, in a statement.
The new bill also lowers the bar on requirements for what the telecom industry must report to the public about records requests from the government.
"Those transparency reporting provisions have been weakened to the point that they are almost identical to what the Justice Department has already agreed to let the companies report," said Bankston.
"The bill has been watered down far, far down even from the compromise that was struck when the bill was voted out of committee," said Patrick Toomey of the American Civil Liberties Union, according to the Huffington Post. "While it represents a slight improvement from the status quo, it isn't the reform bill that Americans deserve."
The now "watered down" USA Freedom Act heads to the House floor this week.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy