With House Vote, GOP Puts Your Personal Online Data Up for Sale
With Trump expected to sign proposed law, resolution would dismantle 'years of privacy protection that people have had in this country'
Updated:
Despite widespread popular outcry, House Republicans on Tuesday voted to strip citizens' of their right to privacy online, selling out the American public to the deep-pocketed telecom industry.
With 215 voting for and 205 against, 15 GOP representatives joined the Democrats in opposing the S.J. Res. 34, a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to repeal the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) privacy provision. Six Republicans and three Democrats abstained. Roll call here.
Open internet and privacy advocates immediately condemned the resolution, now poised to become law pending a likely signature President Donald Trump.
Laying out the implications of the vote, Nathan White, senior legislative manager at Access Now, declared, "Congress today voted to sell off your privacy and your security online."
"Your internet service provider can see almost everything you do online -- from many of the websites you visit, to apps you use, and even some of your private communications," he continued. "[Internet Service Providers] (ISPs) want to sell off that treasure trove to increase corporate profits, and apparently Congress is fine with that."
Evan Greer, campaign director of Fight for the Future, said that Republican lawmakers "once again that they care more about the wishes of the corporations that fund their campaigns than they do about the safety and security of their constituents,"
"Gutting these privacy rules won't just allow Internet Service Providers to spy on us and sell our personal information, it will also enable more unconstitutional mass government surveillance, and fundamentally undermine our cybersecurity by making our sensitive personal information vulnerable to hackers, identity thieves, and foreign governments," she added.
Neema Singh Guliani, ACLU legislative counsel, said that it is "extremely disappointing that Congress is sacrificing the privacy rights of Americans in the interest of protecting the profits of major internet companies including Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon."
"President Trump," Guliani continued, "now has the opportunity to veto this resolution and show he is not just a president for CEOs but for all Americans. Trump should use his power to protect everyone's right to privacy."
Despite the call for Trump to stand up for privacy rights, a White House press statement released earlier Tuesday indicated that his advisers will "recommend that he sign the bill into law."
Taking to Twitter, Greer further pointed out that the privacy violations will disproportionately impact marginalized communities like LGBTQ people, explaining how the widespread collection of data could present a "backdoor opportunity to target people based on their beliefs or sexuality."
Further, as Matt Stoller, fellow at the Open Markets Program at the New America thinktank, outlined in a lengthy Twitter thread earlier Tuesday, the resolution is more than an invasion of privacy but also "about market power and the ability to manipulate you with algorithms."
"Do you want your insurance company to adjust your rates based on your web browsing activity?" Stoller asked. "Do you want prospective employers to use as a criteria who you are thinking of dating? Do you want your ISP or any buyers of data to know you are communicating with politicians or political advocates? Do you want airlines to raise ticket prices on you without you realizing it, based on their knowledge a family member just died?" He added, "That's what this is about."
The danger of "predatory marketing" schemes was also highlighted by Color of Change executive director Rashad Robinson, who wrote: "Ending these important privacy protections gives greedy corporations unfettered access to our personal data and the power to further exploit vulnerable communities. The data that big corporations collect from Black broadband users leads to predatory marketing, which starts at a young age and lasts throughout our lives. Without the crucial FCC regulations implemented last year, Black and marginalized communities will continue to experience online price gouging, data discrimination, and digital redlining."
Earlier:
Privacy advocates are frantically urging voters to contact their Republican representatives as the U.S. House on Tuesday prepares to vote on legislation which would strip citizens of their right to online privacy.
| #BroadbandPrivacy Tweets |
The vote, scheduled to take place at 3pm EDT, is on S.J. Res. 34, a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to repeal the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) privacy provision, which required that providers such as Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon get users' permission before collecting or selling sensitive data.
Should House Republicans follow those in the Senate who voted 50-48 to back the resolution, it is widely expected that President Donald Trump will sign it into law.
What this means practically for users of the internet is that one's search history--information about health, finances, and other private matters--as well as their location and the applications they use, could soon be tracked by internet service providers (ISPs) and then sold to a third-party without an individual's permission.
As lawmakers took to the floor to debate the resolution, internet users and consumer watchdogs flooded their offices with phone calls, pleading with their elected officials to protect the Obama-era provision. Updates are being shared on social media with the hashtag #broadbandprivacy while the debate is available to watch on C-SPAN.
Vice News' Noah Kulwin explains the thinking behind the gross overreach: "Facebook and Google, which together have a de facto duopoly on digital advertising dollars, already collect this sort of information and use it to help advertisers better target users. Internet providers want a slice of that pie."
And notably, the telecom industry has spent millions lobbying members of Congress to strip such FCC regulations. During the 2014 election cycle, for example, the industry spent a total of $99.3 million, with Comcast alone spending around $16.9 million.
What's more, coming in the form of a CRA, the legislation prevents the FCC from putting any similar rules in place in the future. As Jeremy Gillula, senior staff technologist with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) explained to NPR ahead of the vote, the bill "really is changing the status quo. It is essentially dismantling years of privacy protection that people have had in this country."
Responding to pressure, numerous Democratic lawmakers also used Twitter ahead of the vote to defend the rule and declare their opposition to undoing it.
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
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 from the outset was 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 and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just four days to go in our Spring Campaign, we are not even halfway to our goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Updated:
Despite widespread popular outcry, House Republicans on Tuesday voted to strip citizens' of their right to privacy online, selling out the American public to the deep-pocketed telecom industry.
With 215 voting for and 205 against, 15 GOP representatives joined the Democrats in opposing the S.J. Res. 34, a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to repeal the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) privacy provision. Six Republicans and three Democrats abstained. Roll call here.
Open internet and privacy advocates immediately condemned the resolution, now poised to become law pending a likely signature President Donald Trump.
Laying out the implications of the vote, Nathan White, senior legislative manager at Access Now, declared, "Congress today voted to sell off your privacy and your security online."
"Your internet service provider can see almost everything you do online -- from many of the websites you visit, to apps you use, and even some of your private communications," he continued. "[Internet Service Providers] (ISPs) want to sell off that treasure trove to increase corporate profits, and apparently Congress is fine with that."
Evan Greer, campaign director of Fight for the Future, said that Republican lawmakers "once again that they care more about the wishes of the corporations that fund their campaigns than they do about the safety and security of their constituents,"
"Gutting these privacy rules won't just allow Internet Service Providers to spy on us and sell our personal information, it will also enable more unconstitutional mass government surveillance, and fundamentally undermine our cybersecurity by making our sensitive personal information vulnerable to hackers, identity thieves, and foreign governments," she added.
Neema Singh Guliani, ACLU legislative counsel, said that it is "extremely disappointing that Congress is sacrificing the privacy rights of Americans in the interest of protecting the profits of major internet companies including Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon."
"President Trump," Guliani continued, "now has the opportunity to veto this resolution and show he is not just a president for CEOs but for all Americans. Trump should use his power to protect everyone's right to privacy."
Despite the call for Trump to stand up for privacy rights, a White House press statement released earlier Tuesday indicated that his advisers will "recommend that he sign the bill into law."
Taking to Twitter, Greer further pointed out that the privacy violations will disproportionately impact marginalized communities like LGBTQ people, explaining how the widespread collection of data could present a "backdoor opportunity to target people based on their beliefs or sexuality."
Further, as Matt Stoller, fellow at the Open Markets Program at the New America thinktank, outlined in a lengthy Twitter thread earlier Tuesday, the resolution is more than an invasion of privacy but also "about market power and the ability to manipulate you with algorithms."
"Do you want your insurance company to adjust your rates based on your web browsing activity?" Stoller asked. "Do you want prospective employers to use as a criteria who you are thinking of dating? Do you want your ISP or any buyers of data to know you are communicating with politicians or political advocates? Do you want airlines to raise ticket prices on you without you realizing it, based on their knowledge a family member just died?" He added, "That's what this is about."
The danger of "predatory marketing" schemes was also highlighted by Color of Change executive director Rashad Robinson, who wrote: "Ending these important privacy protections gives greedy corporations unfettered access to our personal data and the power to further exploit vulnerable communities. The data that big corporations collect from Black broadband users leads to predatory marketing, which starts at a young age and lasts throughout our lives. Without the crucial FCC regulations implemented last year, Black and marginalized communities will continue to experience online price gouging, data discrimination, and digital redlining."
Earlier:
Privacy advocates are frantically urging voters to contact their Republican representatives as the U.S. House on Tuesday prepares to vote on legislation which would strip citizens of their right to online privacy.
| #BroadbandPrivacy Tweets |
The vote, scheduled to take place at 3pm EDT, is on S.J. Res. 34, a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to repeal the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) privacy provision, which required that providers such as Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon get users' permission before collecting or selling sensitive data.
Should House Republicans follow those in the Senate who voted 50-48 to back the resolution, it is widely expected that President Donald Trump will sign it into law.
What this means practically for users of the internet is that one's search history--information about health, finances, and other private matters--as well as their location and the applications they use, could soon be tracked by internet service providers (ISPs) and then sold to a third-party without an individual's permission.
As lawmakers took to the floor to debate the resolution, internet users and consumer watchdogs flooded their offices with phone calls, pleading with their elected officials to protect the Obama-era provision. Updates are being shared on social media with the hashtag #broadbandprivacy while the debate is available to watch on C-SPAN.
Vice News' Noah Kulwin explains the thinking behind the gross overreach: "Facebook and Google, which together have a de facto duopoly on digital advertising dollars, already collect this sort of information and use it to help advertisers better target users. Internet providers want a slice of that pie."
And notably, the telecom industry has spent millions lobbying members of Congress to strip such FCC regulations. During the 2014 election cycle, for example, the industry spent a total of $99.3 million, with Comcast alone spending around $16.9 million.
What's more, coming in the form of a CRA, the legislation prevents the FCC from putting any similar rules in place in the future. As Jeremy Gillula, senior staff technologist with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) explained to NPR ahead of the vote, the bill "really is changing the status quo. It is essentially dismantling years of privacy protection that people have had in this country."
Responding to pressure, numerous Democratic lawmakers also used Twitter ahead of the vote to defend the rule and declare their opposition to undoing it.
Updated:
Despite widespread popular outcry, House Republicans on Tuesday voted to strip citizens' of their right to privacy online, selling out the American public to the deep-pocketed telecom industry.
With 215 voting for and 205 against, 15 GOP representatives joined the Democrats in opposing the S.J. Res. 34, a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to repeal the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) privacy provision. Six Republicans and three Democrats abstained. Roll call here.
Open internet and privacy advocates immediately condemned the resolution, now poised to become law pending a likely signature President Donald Trump.
Laying out the implications of the vote, Nathan White, senior legislative manager at Access Now, declared, "Congress today voted to sell off your privacy and your security online."
"Your internet service provider can see almost everything you do online -- from many of the websites you visit, to apps you use, and even some of your private communications," he continued. "[Internet Service Providers] (ISPs) want to sell off that treasure trove to increase corporate profits, and apparently Congress is fine with that."
Evan Greer, campaign director of Fight for the Future, said that Republican lawmakers "once again that they care more about the wishes of the corporations that fund their campaigns than they do about the safety and security of their constituents,"
"Gutting these privacy rules won't just allow Internet Service Providers to spy on us and sell our personal information, it will also enable more unconstitutional mass government surveillance, and fundamentally undermine our cybersecurity by making our sensitive personal information vulnerable to hackers, identity thieves, and foreign governments," she added.
Neema Singh Guliani, ACLU legislative counsel, said that it is "extremely disappointing that Congress is sacrificing the privacy rights of Americans in the interest of protecting the profits of major internet companies including Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon."
"President Trump," Guliani continued, "now has the opportunity to veto this resolution and show he is not just a president for CEOs but for all Americans. Trump should use his power to protect everyone's right to privacy."
Despite the call for Trump to stand up for privacy rights, a White House press statement released earlier Tuesday indicated that his advisers will "recommend that he sign the bill into law."
Taking to Twitter, Greer further pointed out that the privacy violations will disproportionately impact marginalized communities like LGBTQ people, explaining how the widespread collection of data could present a "backdoor opportunity to target people based on their beliefs or sexuality."
Further, as Matt Stoller, fellow at the Open Markets Program at the New America thinktank, outlined in a lengthy Twitter thread earlier Tuesday, the resolution is more than an invasion of privacy but also "about market power and the ability to manipulate you with algorithms."
"Do you want your insurance company to adjust your rates based on your web browsing activity?" Stoller asked. "Do you want prospective employers to use as a criteria who you are thinking of dating? Do you want your ISP or any buyers of data to know you are communicating with politicians or political advocates? Do you want airlines to raise ticket prices on you without you realizing it, based on their knowledge a family member just died?" He added, "That's what this is about."
The danger of "predatory marketing" schemes was also highlighted by Color of Change executive director Rashad Robinson, who wrote: "Ending these important privacy protections gives greedy corporations unfettered access to our personal data and the power to further exploit vulnerable communities. The data that big corporations collect from Black broadband users leads to predatory marketing, which starts at a young age and lasts throughout our lives. Without the crucial FCC regulations implemented last year, Black and marginalized communities will continue to experience online price gouging, data discrimination, and digital redlining."
Earlier:
Privacy advocates are frantically urging voters to contact their Republican representatives as the U.S. House on Tuesday prepares to vote on legislation which would strip citizens of their right to online privacy.
| #BroadbandPrivacy Tweets |
The vote, scheduled to take place at 3pm EDT, is on S.J. Res. 34, a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to repeal the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) privacy provision, which required that providers such as Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon get users' permission before collecting or selling sensitive data.
Should House Republicans follow those in the Senate who voted 50-48 to back the resolution, it is widely expected that President Donald Trump will sign it into law.
What this means practically for users of the internet is that one's search history--information about health, finances, and other private matters--as well as their location and the applications they use, could soon be tracked by internet service providers (ISPs) and then sold to a third-party without an individual's permission.
As lawmakers took to the floor to debate the resolution, internet users and consumer watchdogs flooded their offices with phone calls, pleading with their elected officials to protect the Obama-era provision. Updates are being shared on social media with the hashtag #broadbandprivacy while the debate is available to watch on C-SPAN.
Vice News' Noah Kulwin explains the thinking behind the gross overreach: "Facebook and Google, which together have a de facto duopoly on digital advertising dollars, already collect this sort of information and use it to help advertisers better target users. Internet providers want a slice of that pie."
And notably, the telecom industry has spent millions lobbying members of Congress to strip such FCC regulations. During the 2014 election cycle, for example, the industry spent a total of $99.3 million, with Comcast alone spending around $16.9 million.
What's more, coming in the form of a CRA, the legislation prevents the FCC from putting any similar rules in place in the future. As Jeremy Gillula, senior staff technologist with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) explained to NPR ahead of the vote, the bill "really is changing the status quo. It is essentially dismantling years of privacy protection that people have had in this country."
Responding to pressure, numerous Democratic lawmakers also used Twitter ahead of the vote to defend the rule and declare their opposition to undoing it.