Senate Passes Surveillance Bill Without Ban On Web History Snooping (theverge.com) 62
The Senate has voted to reauthorize the USA Freedom Act without adding an amendment that would have restricted warrantless collection of internet search and web browsing data. It did however adopt an amendment to expand oversight. The Verge reports: The USA Freedom Reauthorization Act restores government powers that expired in March with Section 215 of the Patriot Act. The [Act] lets law enforcement collect "tangible things" related to national security investigations without a warrant, requiring only approval from a secret court that has reportedly rubber-stamped many requests. It passed the House of Representatives earlier this year, but it stalled in the Senate during the start of the coronavirus pandemic. Today, senators approved it with 80 votes for and 16 votes against, according to The Hill. The House of Representatives will need to approve the amended version of the bill before sending it to the president's desk.
The USA Freedom Act was designed to reform the Patriot Act and limit large-scale phone record collection, following leaks from NSA contractor Edward Snowden in 2013. But surveillance critics wanted to extend its limits in the reauthorized version. Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) successfully passed an amendment that would expand the role of independent advisers to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court. Conversely, Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Steve Daines (R-MT) failed by one vote to pass a rule prohibiting warrantless surveillance of internet search and browsing records. Wyden ultimately voted against the reauthorization.
The USA Freedom Act was designed to reform the Patriot Act and limit large-scale phone record collection, following leaks from NSA contractor Edward Snowden in 2013. But surveillance critics wanted to extend its limits in the reauthorized version. Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) successfully passed an amendment that would expand the role of independent advisers to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court. Conversely, Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Steve Daines (R-MT) failed by one vote to pass a rule prohibiting warrantless surveillance of internet search and browsing records. Wyden ultimately voted against the reauthorization.
If you'd like to add to the pile (Score:2)
There's a firefox addon called trackmenot that can do demi-random searches based on the news and click result links for you. I think there's a version for chrome, but I haven't tried that one.
Re: (Score:3)
1. It's malware
2. ISPs will flag you as having a malware infection for using it?
Re: (Score:2)
1. I doubt it's much higher than the chance that a new in box computer can have malware. Source is on Github, has plenty of users.
2. I haven't heard of this in any context and am interested to hear more.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Famous last words.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: If you'd like to add to the pile (Score:2)
"Patriot"? "Freedom"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Orwell would be proud of the amount of doublespeak on display here.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that was my first thought as well - what the act gives us is the exact opposite of "Freedom".
Re: (Score:2)
The thing that amuses me is that there is an enormous amount of propaganda about how a healthcare tracking app that notifies you if you have been close to someone who has caught Covid-19 is being an attack on freedom. There will be none for this new monitoring legislation that collects every random link you click on for the rest of your life and delivers it to the government. Hilarious.
Re: "Patriot"? "Freedom"? (Score:1)
The Do as we say or lose your Freedom Act.
Re: (Score:2)
Protect Rights National Free Safety Rights American Freedom Rights Protection Act was already taken.
Re: (Score:1)
"Freedom" Act (Score:4)
Re: (Score:1)
Meaning of "Freedom" (Score:2)
I do not think that word means what you say it does.
Sure it does. It does cost you anything to be monitored, it is completely free.
"..expand oversight.." (Score:2)
failed by one vote to pass (Score:2)
Yeah, where was Sanders?
Re: (Score:1)
Good question because he wasn't even there [senate.gov] in the chamber during vote. A few people have asked that exact question and his office is awfully quiet about giving any answers. So doing blow and hookers? Netflix and Chill with AOC? Just enjoying the sunny day they were having in his home town that day? Sheltering in place to keep the rona at bay? Who knows really!? But it's absolutely clear that he wasn't in the Senate chambers that day.
Fun thing one of my Senators "Alexander" is doing some self quaranti
Re: (Score:2)
Probably buying another house with whatever payoff he got from the DNC for dropping out of the race this time.
Re: failed by one vote to pass (Score:1)
Better than being shot to death, "make it look like an accident" or child porn planted on his computer if he doesn't to the fascists' line. Which probably were the other options.
Also, call me when you found any other candidate who doesn't have many houses...
Re: (Score:2)
You really have too much time on your hands. Don't you have a job? Or posting paranoid conspiracy theories is your job?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, where was Sanders?
Presumably he was with the 2 Republicans, and 1 Democrat who also didn't vote.
But yeah totally Bernie's fault.
Re: (Score:2)
He claims to be such a big stand out for our rights. Only one more vote was needed. Where the hell was he?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Nothing was expected from them. And republican/democrat makes no difference. Sanders's big mouth failed to translate into action. When he puts himself on a pedestal it makes him more noticeable
Are we winning yet? (Score:2)
Because I"m getting pretty tired of this administration.
Re:Are we winning yet? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because I"m getting pretty tired of this administration.
Okay, I hate Trump too - check my posting history here, if you have doubts. But this is bipartisan crap which went on during the Obama and Bush administrations as well.
And, as I recall - after the Snowden leaks, Obama made some statement about "it's important we have this conversation" after his people had been doing pretty much everything they could to prevent us from being aware of what had been going on.
There are lots of things we can justifiably blame Trump for. But this didn't start with him.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
There are lots of things we can justifiably blame the Republican Party for. This started (and continues) due to them. FTFY.
Re: (Score:2)
No, this started under J. Edgar Hoover, back in the 1930's.
Might want to check who was in control of the House, Senate, and Oval Office at the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice sentence grammar Nazi.
The "best and the brightest", indeed
Re:Are we winning yet? (Score:5, Insightful)
Republican or Democrat President. Republican or Democrat Congress. The Patriot Act would've been passed either way. We were at war, and people were willing to let the government get away with all sorts of stuff to win that war. Especially when it became known that the attacks were carried out by foreign nationals residing in the U.S. with occasional communication with their minders outside the country (precisely the type of communications the Patriot Act allows the government to wiretap).
The time for the Patriot Act to be repealed was when the war was over. Like say, May 2, 2011 - the day Osama Bin Laden was killed. When Democrats controlled the Presidency and Senate, and Republicans the House (curiously by almost the exact same margins as today, just with the parties reversed). But no, they all liked the additional powers it granted the government, so they kept renewing it.
That was the real date the travesty began. In 2001, Bush, Cheney, and Ashcroft at least had justification for rolling back some of our Constitutional protections - as has been done in nearly every war. But it was Obama and the split Congress in 2011 who kept re-approving it [wikipedia.org] after it had served its purpose and wasn't justifiably necessary anymore. (Mind you, Trump has been no better, urging its re-authorization.)
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. It started with Clinton after the first WTC bombing. Bush just slapped a little lipstick on that pig and gave it a snappy new name.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump didn't vote on this, the U.S. Senate did and Trump isn't a member. Is anyone going to check how their own Senators voted and contact them about it if they're too busy carrying about about Trump? Fuck no.
Congress pretty much alway
Re: (Score:2)
Can't Trump (and previously Obama) refuse to sign it into law? I believe it is called a veto and would take a super majority to bypass the President, who could then honestly say he was against it.
This is why we need a written constitution! (Score:4, Insightful)
If America had the 4th amendment, this would never have gotten off the ground... oh, wait.
Re: This is why we need a written constitution! (Score:2)
Pack the courts with sympathetic judges that will rule against the Constitution as written.
Re: (Score:2)
Once your spy agencies have enough dirt on nearly every judge and politician, it doesn't matter who gets picked.
Re: (Score:1)
Does everyone has skeletons in their closet? Surely there can be some juris doctorate graduates who are normal upright citizens.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't have to be 100%. And remember, the people picking the candidates don't have the same access to the dirt.
And no, I don't think you make it to the US Senate without having some significant skeletons hidden away.
Re: (Score:2)
They say warrantless, but then they say also they have to get approval from a Court. It isn't clear that they don't actually have a warrant in this case.
Voted Against: 14D & 2R (Score:2)
Fourteen Democrats voted against the bill: Sens. Tammy Baldwin (Wis.), Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Maria Cantwell (Wash.), Dick Durbin (Ill.), Martin Heinrich (N.M.), Mazie Hirono (Hawaii), Ed Markey (Mass.), Jeff Merkley (Ore.), Patty Murray (Wash.), Brian Schatz (Hawaii), Jon Tester (Mont), Tom Udall (N.M.), Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Ron Wyden (Ore.).
On the GOP side, Paul and Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, voted against the bill.
It also remains unclear if Presi
Re: Voted Against: 14D & 2R (Score:2)
He'll sign it. His problem about the spying is that it was done to him by Democrats.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, he could then claim to be against it.
Re: (Score:1)
And the amendment to prohibit internet browsing history collection? 27 republicans and 10 democrats.
https://www.senate.gov/legisla... [senate.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
shortest comment (Score:1)
Thanks Bernie (Score:1, Interesting)
Couldn't even bother to show up to vote, and the roll calls showing him absent. He would have tipped the scales to prevent the collection of browsing history.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, as a Sanders supporter I am quite curious why he was absent. I am also curious why those 6 Dems voted no. Whose pocket were they in for this?
Re: (Score:2)
Apathy like yours doesn't help.
Criminal Evolution (Score:1)
Majority of the Senate wanted the protection (Score:3)
Four senators missed the vote - Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Ben Sasse (R-Neb.). The amendment would've passed the vote and (since it had majority support) become a part of the bill if any one of them had bothered to vote yes.