pull down to refresh

One bill is supported by both Biden's White House and Trump allies, the second is supported by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
A Floor vote could start as early as today - Tuesday December 12, 2023.
As well as this The Intercept piece, see also https://www.wired.com/story/section-702-house-bills-plewsa-frra/
I've included highlights from both articles below

Excerpt

Competing bills moving through the House of Representatives both reauthorize Section 702 surveillance—but they pave very different paths forward for Americans' privacy and civil liberties.
The committee is pushing a bill that civil liberties experts say would amount to the largest expansion of domestic surveillance in decades.
Section 702 surveillance begins with monitoring the communications of foreigners believed to be located outside of the United States. Under these conditions, the US government can ignore most constitutional protections, wiretapping nearly any individual it deems likely to possess—or likely to possess in the future—information of intelligence value.
Correspondence between foreign targets and their lawyers, doctors, religious leaders, wives, husbands, and children are all open for collection, a fact that would not change if every one of them were a US citizen. Whatever calls, emails, or texts are intercepted as a result of targeting a foreigner under 702 are legally permissible, or “incidental,” in spy agency parlance.
Once that information is legally in the government’s possession, the use of it is subject to a different set of legal doctrines, many of which ignore the novel circumstances under which it was initially seized. A federal appeals court in 2021 described the “two-step” process by which communications may be seized under 702 and only years later dug up for an entirely different reason. The process on the whole is constitutional, it said, so long as each step “independently complies with the Fourth Amendment.” Under this logic, the FBI has been permitted to treat the private communications of Americans—secretly obtained during foreign surveillance—as roughly the equivalent of information it stumbles across in plain view.
How often Americans are targeted by Section 702 surveillance is a question that the government says it genuinely can’t answer. It does, however, disapprove of using the word “target” to describe Americans whose calls and texts are intercepted by US spies.
Congressional sources opposed to the FRRA, the House Intelligence Committee’s bill, say it reflects a deference toward executive power that has become customary among House and Senate intelligence staff. In arguing that constant experience has never shown secret agencies to be predisposed to self-restraint, a senior aide pointed to the case of an intelligence analyst caught abusing 702 data for “online dating” purposes last year. It had recently been confirmed, they said, that the analyst had not been fired.
“The Intelligence Committee’s ‘FISA Reform and Reauthorization Act’ may have the word ‘reform’ in its name, but the bill’s text proves otherwise,” says Representative Zoe Lofgren. “Congress
In an eleventh-hour effort to preserve and expand the federal government’s warrantless surveillance powers, the House Intelligence Committee advanced a bill last week that has the full-throated support of Donald Trump’s senior law enforcement appointees. The bill, which has been described by civil liberties advocates as “the largest expansion of domestic government surveillance since the Patriot Act,” would increase federal surveillance agencies’ access to the communications of U.S. citizens with almost no federal oversight or restrictions. 
Civil rights experts warn that the sweeping powers the Intelligence Committee’s bill would create would be a danger under any presidential administration, and a particular threat should should Trump win the 2024 election. “Jim Himes appears to be desperately throwing a Patriot Act-like expansion of warrantless surveillance into the hands of Donald Trump,” Sean Vitka, policy director at Demand Progress, told The Intercept. “It’s beyond unacceptable and must be called out.” 
According to Wired, the Intelligence Committee bill is being quietly supported by the White House and senior intelligence community officials. 
The House Judiciary Committee, meanwhile, free from the influence wielded by spy agencies over the Intelligence Committee, has advanced a competing piece of legislation, which would defang the 702 authority by forcing government officials to obtain warrants prior to its use, in addition to a number of other reforms that would inhibit warrantless data collection. In Congress, the bill is supported by members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus as well as the right-wing Freedom Caucus. It’s also backed by civil liberties advocates including the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union.
On Tuesday, the House is likely to vote on the Section 702 legislation through a process known as Queen of the Hill. The unusual parliamentary procedure would put the two competing bills up for a floor vote, with a simple winner-takes-all majority needed to secure passage. Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., did not respond to The Intercept’s request for comment about his position on the dueling reauthorization efforts. 
Congress will also be voting this week on the National Defense Authorization Act, a must-pass bill that contains a provision extending the 702 authority in its current form until April. 
Section 702 allows the U.S. government to gather the communications of non-U.S. citizens abroad, but in practice, it allows the government to surveil Americans who are in touch with foreign nationals as well. The authority has been used to conduct thousands of “backdoor” searches on U.S. citizens, including elected officials and activists. The spying power grants the government the ability to force telecommunications providers to hand over information on its targets. The language in the Intelligence Committee bill would expand the definition of entities that must comply with requests under 702, making it such that almost any company or organization involved in communications would have to surrender information to investigators without a warrant.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., has described it as a “Patriot Act 2.0.” Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center, said that the House Intelligence Committee’s bill would have devastating consequences for everyday Americans. “Hotels, libraries, coffee shops, and other places that offer wifi to their customers could be forced to serve as surrogate spies. They could be required to configure their systems to ensure that they can provide the government access to entire streams of communications,” she tweeted. “Even a repair person who comes to fix the wifi in your home would meet the revised definition: that person is an ’employee’ of a ‘service provider’ who has ‘access’ to ‘equipment’ (your router) on which communications are transmitted.”
Imagine if at the turn of the last century there was a surveillance bill put forth that asked for mandating government manufacturing and installation of bugs in your home, in your office, in the local store, that are combed through to look for infractions of an increasingly restrictive and unjust legal system.
I see no difference in its radically fascist approach. They are taking their cues from communist dictators.
reply
Is the US still a free country?
reply
Hasn't been for many years. Not truly free. Honestly, the more history I read it hasn't been since AT LEAST the war between the states.
reply
deleted by author
reply
I will add that my public school education taught me the same talking points you just used. I used to argue with people just as you are doing. Then I read more of Lincoln's writings and historians critical of state power. I trust that you are in the same boat I was in many years ago. Propagandized by the government schools and pop culture.
reply
Clearly slavery is evil. The war was fought to maintain the union. The south wanted to keep slavery and the north had more power/wealth. The south wanted to leave the union (which it had the right to do). Lincoln would not allow them to leave so they fought a war. Saying the war was fought over slavery is both reductive and wrong. It was a key factor but not the goal of the north.
But that's not what I'm referring to. I'm referring to the actions of the state against citizens during that time. State power greatly expanded. Not only against the south but against citizens of the north that both opposed slavery and the war(Copperheads). There really wasn't a good guy in the war between the states. Like today, the north used a moral cause to justify its incredible bloodshed. The US is the only nation to end slavery by war. There were many other options besides war. Slavery is one of the greatest evils man perpetrates but that war didn't end it. Not in the US or anywhere. I'm grateful that the southern slaves were freed but I will not lionize Lincoln or the war.
A case could be made that the US was never free. I'm open to that. After all slavery existed. Additionally you can point to many other actions of the state that demonstrated this.
reply
I forgot to add. During the war (its always during war that we lose the most freedoms) Lincoln imprisoned journalists that were critical of his polices. This was a clear abuse of power and the 1st amendment and one common during times of war. Lincoln basically acted as a dictator during the war. These are some reasons I referred to that time.
If another state had decided to succeed from the Union I can guarantee you he would have tried to stop it. Regardless of the reason.
reply
Appreciate that history & perspective.
Many people around here seem to be sleeping or ignorant to this knowledge. Hard to not reach the conclusion that history is repeating.
reply
The other interesting thing on this topic is the work of economist Bob Murphy on the absolute failure of slavery. Not only is it immoral. It is also a poor use of human resources. He makes a very interesting case that not only did slavery harm the slaves it also harmed those that weren't slaves nor owners of slaves. The collective productivity lost by enslaving people is huge. If you think about it, it makes sense. A free man will have incentives to do his best work with both his mind and body. A slave will rightfully despise his owner and the work he is forced to do. This will lead to less productivity.
That line of thinking made me wonder what amazing discoveries we are missing out on due to the poverty in most of the world. What minds are we being robbed of? What boys and girls around the world could cure cancer or solve other huge issues? What if we had a fair and just money? We have no idea what we could be missing out on.
reply
Great points @kepford. I was planning to touch on a similar theme on a ~privacy topic I have in the works. That people may well look-back on financial colonisation with as much anger and disgust as they do with slavery and geographical colonisation today.
Probably 20 years ago I was a kid arguing with my wife's cousin about the "civil war". I was firm in my conviction that it was about slavery. I was firm but ignorant. I knew the guy was way more knowledgeable on the subject. He planted seeds. Probably 10 years later I read The Real Lincoln - What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe by Thomas J. Dilorenzo. That peaked my curiosity and I started reading more about this period of time. And surprise to surprise the government schools leave a lot of important info out of the story in their path to making a believer in the state.
The classic response to criticism of Lincoln is to shout racism or Neo-confederate! Its propaganda programming to call people that are a threat to a narrative names. When we sink to that level we have lost. You may not agree me but at least you shouldn't be ignorant of history if you are gonna blindly trust the "official" story.
reply