Fractured Consensus Seen in House Vote on Surveillance
An amendment to prohibit intelligence agencies from performing bulk collection of records such as telephone metadata was narrowly defeated in the House of Representatives yesterday by a vote of 205-217.
Although the amendment by Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) was not adopted, its near-passage on a bipartisan basis signaled an extraordinary loss of congressional support for the national security establishment and for the bulk collection of records revealed by Edward Snowden in particular. It is doubtful that any intelligence program can continue for long with 49% of House members opposed to it.
The House debate had a certain theatrical quality because it reflected divergent value judgments more than opposing factual claims.
For proponents of the intelligence program, which is conducted under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, it is a lawful and constitutional effort. In itself, they insist, the collection of telephone records by the government no more involves “spying” on Americans than does the collection of such records by the telephone company– which is to say, not at all. And the program has been justified, they say, by its success in detecting and preventing terrorist attacks.
To opponents of the program, however, intelligence collection of records concerning private persons who are not suspected of any crime is an impermissible infringement on the Fourth Amendment. Opponents also disbelieve that the program has contributed significantly to combating terrorism, or else they would implicitly forego any additional margin of security that it provides. Moreover, they say, the bulk collection of records deviates from the language and the intent of the law.
Even in victory, supporters of the current program do not believe the matter is settled. Rep. Mike Rogers, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and a principal defender of the existing program, said he would consider further proposals to mitigate privacy concerns.
“I will pledge to each one of you today and give you my word that this fall, when we do the Intel authorization bill, that we will work to find additional privacy protections with this program,” he said.
The emerging federal metascience community is asking fascinating questions that are equally vital for democratic legitimacy: beyond “did this program work” to “how does the federal R&D enterprise itself work, and how could it work better?”
If you’re new to the climate intervention space, welcome! The TL;DR: if we can’t stop the most catastrophic impacts of climate change with current tools quickly enough, then we need a bigger toolbox.
After months of delay, the council tasked by President Trump to review the FEMA released its final report. Our disaster policy nerds have thoughts.
FAS and FLI partnered to build a series of convenings and reports across the intersections of artificial intelligence (AI) with biosecurity, cybersecurity, nuclear command and control, military integration, and frontier AI governance. This project brought together leaders across these areas and created a space that was rigorous, transpartisan, and solutions-oriented to approach how we should think about how AI is rapidly changing global risks.