Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
Wed Jul 31, 2013, 01:33 PM Jul 2013

Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy, oversight hearing on surveillance programs [View all]

Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.),
Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee,
>Hearing on “Strengthening Privacy Rights and National Security:
Oversight of FISA Surveillance Programs


July 31, 2013

Today, the Judiciary Committee will scrutinize government surveillance programs conducted under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA. In the years since September 11th, Congress has repeatedly expanded the scope of FISA, and given the Government sweeping new powers to collect information on law-abiding Americans – and we must carefully consider now whether those laws have gone too far.

Last month, many Americans learned for the first time that one of these authorities – Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act – has for years been secretly interpreted to authorize the collection of Americans’ phone records on an unprecedented scale. Information was also leaked about Section 702 of FISA, which authorizes NSA to collect the communications of foreigners overseas.

Let me make clear that I do not condone the way these and other highly classified programs were disclosed, and I am concerned about the potential damage to our intelligence-gathering capabilities and national security. We need to hold people accountable for allowing such a massive leak to occur, and we need to examine how to prevent this type of breach in the future.

In the wake of these leaks, the President said that this is an opportunity to have an open and thoughtful debate about these issues. I welcome that statement, because this is a debate that several of us on this Committee have been trying to have for years. And if we are going to have the debate that the President called for, the executive branch must be a full partner. We need straightforward answers and I am concerned that we are not getting them.

Just recently, the Director of National Intelligence acknowledged that he provided false testimony about the NSA surveillance programs during a Senate hearing in March, and his office had to remove a fact sheet from its website after concerns were raised about its accuracy. I appreciate that it is difficult to talk about classified programs in public settings, but the American people expect and deserve honest answers.

It also has been far too difficult to get a straight answer about the effectiveness of the Section 215 phone records program. Whether this program is a critical national security tool is a key question for Congress as we consider possible changes to the law. Some supporters of this program have repeatedly conflated the efficacy of the Section 215 bulk metadata collection program with that of Section 702 of FISA. I do not think this is a coincidence, and it needs to stop. The patience and trust of the American people is starting to wear thin.

I asked General Alexander about the effectiveness of the Section 215 phone records program at an Appropriations Committee hearing last month, and he agreed to provide a classified list of terrorist events that Section 215 helped to prevent. I have reviewed that list. Although I agree that it speaks to the value of the overseas content collection implemented under Section 702, it does not do the same with for Section 215. The list simply does not reflect dozens or even several terrorist plots that Section 215 helped thwart or prevent – let alone 54, as some have suggested.

These facts matter. This bulk collection program has massive privacy implications. The phone records of all of us in this room reside in an NSA database. I have said repeatedly that just because we have the ability to collect huge amounts of data does not mean that we should be doing so. In fact, it has been reported that the bulk collection of Internet metadata was shut down because it failed to produce meaningful intelligence. We need to take an equally close look at the phone records program. If this program is not effective, it must end. And so far, I am not convinced by what I have seen.

I am sure that we will hear from witnesses today who will say that these programs are critical in helping to identify and connect the so-called “dots.” But there will always be more “dots” to collect, analyze, and try to connect. The Government is already collecting data on millions of innocent Americans on a daily basis, based on a secret legal interpretation of a statute that does not on its face appear to authorize this type of bulk collection. What will be next? And when is enough, enough?

Congress must carefully consider the powerful surveillance tools that we grant to the Government, and ensure that there is stringent oversight, accountability, and transparency. This debate should not be limited to those surveillance programs about which information was leaked. That is why I have introduced a bill that addresses not only Section 215 and Section 702, but also National Security Letters, roving wiretaps, and other authorities under the PATRIOT Act. As we have seen in the case of ECPA reform, the protection of Americans’ privacy is not a partisan issue. I thank Senator Lee and others for their support of my FISA bill, and hope that other Senators will join our efforts.

Today, I look forward to the testimony of the Government witnesses and outside experts. I am particularly grateful for the participation of Judge Carr, a current member of the judiciary and a former judge of the FISA Court. I hope that today’s hearing will provide an opportunity for an open debate about the law, the policy, and the FISA Court process that led us to this point. We must do all that we can to ensure our nation’s security while protecting the fundamental liberties that make this country great.

http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/senate-judiciary-committee-holds-oversight-hearing-on-government-surveillance-programs


Senate pushes sanctions on nations aiding Snowden
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023338422

50 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A Reasonable And Nuanced Statement, Ma'am The Magistrate Jul 2013 #1
Yes. n/t ProSense Jul 2013 #2
"This bulk collection program has massive privacy implications." NoOneMan Jul 2013 #3
You Make A Pane Of Glass Look Like A Slab Of Slate, Sir The Magistrate Jul 2013 #4
Everyone's gotta be good at something NoOneMan Jul 2013 #5
Dunno, Sir: Seen Plenty Weren't Good At, Or For, A Damn Thing The Magistrate Jul 2013 #8
LOL! n/t ProSense Jul 2013 #7
actually, Pat Leahy's statement in whole, dear sir, is cali Jul 2013 #24
And You Believe Me Unable To Comprehend English, Ma'am, Because...? The Magistrate Jul 2013 #27
I, sir, would never suggest any such thing. You did, however cali Jul 2013 #30
Wheels Within The Wheels Within The Wheels Have Never Been Your Strong Suit, Ma'am The Magistrate Jul 2013 #32
oh, I don't know about that, dear sir. cali Jul 2013 #33
"Hypocrisy Is The Tribute Vice Pays To Virtue" The Magistrate Jul 2013 #34
Is the "dear sir" shtick a play on Dear Leader? Or is it simply DevonRex Aug 2013 #47
if you wanted to know you could simply have asked. cali Aug 2013 #48
You're welcome. I ProSense Jul 2013 #6
He may not condone the way it was disclosed, but if it hadn't been the "discussion" wouldn't Tierra_y_Libertad Jul 2013 #9
Funny how that is what the OP chose to highlight... SomethingFishy Jul 2013 #11
"Funny"? Did chosing to "highlight" that point prevent you from reading the entire statement? ProSense Jul 2013 #12
Yes I am terribly upset.. SomethingFishy Jul 2013 #14
Yes, we're all free, and you chose to be upset because I "highlighted" text. ProSense Jul 2013 #16
Yes I'm terribly "upset"... SomethingFishy Jul 2013 #20
We all have opinions. Complaining about "highlighted" text seems silly. n/t ProSense Jul 2013 #21
Yes I bet it does. SomethingFishy Jul 2013 #23
It's not ProSense Jul 2013 #25
Thanks for posting this. Sanity from Leahy. nt msanthrope Jul 2013 #10
Leahy is contained RobertEarl Jul 2013 #13
"Trolls on DU act much the same s those who have obstructed Leahy." ProSense Jul 2013 #18
Alert? Not my game plan RobertEarl Jul 2013 #37
Ah, you're a self-admitted "troll" hunter. ProSense Jul 2013 #39
Mission? RobertEarl Jul 2013 #40
Wait ProSense Jul 2013 #41
Changed my mind RobertEarl Aug 2013 #50
And By Trolls, Sir, You Mean People You Disagree With And Do Not Like? The Magistrate Jul 2013 #19
Leahy is very critical in that statement. that he's polite, doesn't blunt that cali Jul 2013 #26
"we need to examine how to prevent this type of breach in the future." Zorra Jul 2013 #15
That's some really big type, but ProSense Jul 2013 #22
Well, since the crux of your beef with Snowden is that he didn't use official channels NuclearDem Jul 2013 #29
Actually, ProSense Jul 2013 #31
Breaking the Law to Defend Democracy William deB. Mills Aug 2013 #45
K&R BumRushDaShow Jul 2013 #17
we'll see. Leahy's been introducing legislation to do just that for a decade now cali Jul 2013 #28
I doubt he and most of the rest of them BumRushDaShow Jul 2013 #35
no, but he has staff and access to experts cali Jul 2013 #36
Yup. That's what usually happens. nt BumRushDaShow Jul 2013 #38
The text of Leahy's reform bill: ProSense Jul 2013 #42
Abuse of Power William deB. Mills Aug 2013 #43
Franken has been openly supportive of NSA activities despite recent revelations cali Aug 2013 #44
Where Does Senator Franken Stand on NSA Domestic Spying? William deB. Mills Aug 2013 #46
K & R Scurrilous Aug 2013 #49
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Statement of Senator Patr...