House libertarians blast USA Freedom Act | Rare
I want the NAMES of who changed this bill in committee!
House libertarians blast USA Freedom Act | Rare
I want the NAMES of who changed this bill in committee!
Rep. James Sensenbrenner
Rep. James Sensenbrenner
link?
Let me be clear, I wish this bill did more. To my colleagues who lament changes, I agree with you. To privacy groups who are upset about lost provisions, I share your disappointment. The negotiations for this bill were intense, and we had to make compromises, but this bill still deserves support.
The dude from Wisconsin?
House libertarians blast USA Freedom Act | Rare
I want the NAMES of who changed this bill in committee!
Looks like he has some explaining to do to his fellow House members.
Thanks for posting this Beaudreaux.
You're welcome.
It appears that he's trying to say - if we didn't compromise, the bill wouldn't make it through the Senate or maybe even be Vetoed by the President. My oldest son said, that would be fine. At least then the country would know where the Senate and the President stand on freedom, liberty, and the Constitution (specifically the 4th Amendment). I think my son is correct in that. They should have let Harry Reid and Obama explain to the nation why their privacy isn't important anymore and why the Constitution is "just a piece of paper."
Your son is 100% correct. You raised smart kids, my friend.
They sure think so. :shock:
This thread and the story behind it is based on a LIE. There are no House Libertarians. The people named are Republicans and that is how they were elected and that is their party identification.
You're welcome.
It appears that he's trying to say - if we didn't compromise, the bill wouldn't make it through the Senate or maybe even be Vetoed by the President. My oldest son said, that would be fine. At least then the country would know where the Senate and the President stand on freedom, liberty, and the Constitution (specifically the 4th Amendment). I think my son is correct in that. They should have let Harry Reid and Obama explain to the nation why their privacy isn't important anymore and why the Constitution is "just a piece of paper."
This thread and the story behind it is based on a LIE. There are no House Libertarians. The people named are Republicans and that is how they were elected and that is their party identification.
Today, I will vote no on #HR3361, the #USAFREEDOMAct.
I am an original cosponsor of the Freedom Act, and I was involved in its drafting. At its best, the Freedom Act would have reined in the government's unconstitutional domestic spying programs, ended the indiscriminate collection of Americans' private records, and made the secret FISA court function more like a real court—with real arguments and real adversaries.
I was and am proud of the work our group, led by Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, did to promote this legislation, as originally drafted.
However, the revised bill that makes its way to the House floor this morning doesn't look much like the Freedom Act.
This morning's bill maintains and codifies a large-scale, unconstitutional domestic spying program. It claims to end "bulk collection" of Americans' data only in a very technical sense: The bill prohibits the government from, for example, ordering a telephone company to turn over all its call records every day.
But the bill was so weakened in behind-the-scenes negotiations over the last week that the government still can order—without probable cause—a telephone company to turn over all call records for "area code 616" or for "phone calls made east of the Mississippi." The bill green-lights the government's massive data collection activities that sweep up Americans' records in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
The bill does include a few modest improvements to current law. The secret FISA court that approves government surveillance must publish its most significant opinions so that Americans can have some idea of what surveillance the government is doing. The bill authorizes (but does not require) the FISA court to appoint lawyers to argue for Americans' privacy rights, whereas the court now only hears from one side before ruling.
But while the original version of the Freedom Act allowed Sec. 215 of the Patriot Act to expire in June 2015, this morning's bill extends the life of that controversial section for more than two years, through 2017.
I thank Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte for pursuing surveillance reform. I respect Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner and Rep. John Conyers for their work on this issue.
It's shameful that the president of the United States, the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and the leaders of the country's surveillance agencies refuse to accept consensus reforms that will keep our country safe while upholding the Constitution. And it mocks our system of government that they worked to gut key provisions of the Freedom Act behind closed doors.
The American people demand that the Constitution be respected, that our rights and liberties be secured, and that the government stay out of our private lives. Fortunately, there is a growing group of representatives on both sides of the aisle who get it. In the 10 months since I proposed the Amash Amendment to end mass surveillance, we've made big gains.
We will succeed.
Sanford Votes Against USA Freedom Act | Honorable Mark SanfordThere was a lot of action on the House floor yesterday, and I wanted to note one “first” on my end. Today was the first time since returning to Congress I voted against a bill I co-sponsored – the USA Freedom Act. In fact, so did 78 out of the 151 other co-sponsors, which is something you don’t see all that often. The problem here is that what started as a strong bill with any number of good ideas for reforming the National Security Agency was changed dramatically right before voting, so that it looks almost nothing like the bill we co-sponsored.
There were three changes made behind the scenes to this bill before we voted on it that I found especially concerning. One, language that would have required the NSA to make specific requests for information in the course of an investigation was removed. That continued the troubling practice where the NSA could collect large amounts of data in essence just to see what they could use. Two, it would maintain the situation where telephone and technology companies would have to provide large amounts of information without any specific target. This means that in theory the NSA could ask for all the data coming from the 843 area code and it would be perfectly legal. Three, it extends the part of the PATRIOT Act that authorizes this activity for two and a half more years, when it had initially been scheduled to expire next year.
On top of all of that, this weaker version came to the floor under a closed rule, meaning no one could submit any amendments to change the bill. For example, I introduced an NSA reform bill that would have improved internal oversight at the agency, and was planning on introducing that as an amendment. Under this closed rule, we weren’t even given an opportunity to have these amendments considered, much less voted on. The original reforms in the USA Freedom Act would have been meaningful improvements and protections for Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights, but instead we’re left with a watered down substitute that I do not think addresses the legitimate concerns I hear from people in the District about government intrusion into their private lives.
https://www.facebook.com/RepThomasMassie/posts/804932779530888WARNING - This is NOT the USA Freedom Act you think it is: It will actually Legalize #NSA bulk collection on American Citizens.
This vote is going to occur TODAY. Please SHARE:
All over the country, many of our constituents were outraged to learn that the privacy rights they believed to be protected under the 4th Amendment did not apply to NSA surveillance of their communications.
The #USAFreedomAct that is on the floor today is not the bill we and 152 members co-sponsored, nor is it the bill that was a watered-down compromise reported by the Judiciary Committee. It is the result of non-transparent backroom dealings.
Under the finalized floor version of the USA Freedom Act, it would be completely legal for the NSA to request all records for an area code, zip code, or even all of the emails for accounts that start with the letter ‘A,’ all without a warrant.
This is why civil liberties groups such as the Amnesty International, EFF, CDT, and Open Technology Institute have all withdrawn their support; it is why companies like Facebook, Google, Apple, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Yahoo have pulled their support.
Together we offered five amendments during markup, two amendments to the NDAA, and nine amendments to the USA Freedom act in an attempt to restore Americans’ right to privacy.
None of these amendments were given an opportunity for debate or a vote on the House floor. The speed by which this bill is coming up for a vote should give all of us pause. Once again Congress risks promoting mass surveillance rather than stopping it.
We urge you to join us in opposing the USA Freedom Act if you believe it’s time to stop broad government surveillance on innocent Americans, and restore the rights protected by the 4th Amendment.
You posted a little too soon in an effort to play "gotcha" with me.
There is, in fact, a Libertarian party, as well as a libertarian ideology. The ideology came before the party and is not subject to being limited to the party.
Moving along...
and none of those Republicans belong to the Libertarian party. At best - or is it worst - they are faux libertarians in Halloween costume without even the courage of their supposed convictions.
House libertarians blast USA Freedom Act | Rare
I want the NAMES of who changed this bill in committee!
Funny none of those house members are Libertarian? In fact I don't think there is a Libertarian party member in the house or senate? Guess that's what happens when you got 1% of the vote.
I don't blame the OP but the story author should note House Republicans blasted this act since there are NO house libertarians.
You guys are so bad with national security. Which, I guess, is extremely easy to do when you have no responsibility for it. What's the fallout from it in your end? Nothing, really. So I can see why you guys don't care. Just don't expect people with that responsibility to act the same way.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?