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)Senators To Obama: Hey You Can End Bulk Phone Data Collection Today; Obama: Ha, Ha, Ha, Nope! [View all]
Senators To Obama: Hey You Can End Bulk Phone Data Collection Today; Obama: Ha, Ha, Ha, Nope!
by Mike Masnick
Fri, Jun 20th 2014 3:01pm
from the well,-that-was-an-idea dept
This morning, a group of Senators, Mark Udall, Ron Wyden and Martin Heinrich, sent President Obama a letter reminding him that he can live up to his promise to end bulk phone record collection today by simply having the DOJ not seek to renew the court order from the FISA Court getting the phone operators to hand over that data.
We welcome your proposal, announced on March 27, 2014, to end the bulk collection of Americans' phone records under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act. We believe as you do that the government can protect national security by collecting the phone records of individuals connected to terrorism, instead of collecting the records of millions of law-abiding Americans. We also believe that you have the authority to implement your proposal now, rather than continuing to reauthorize the existing bulk collection program in 90-day increments.
And, of course, just hours later, James Clapper responded, not to the letter, but in a Tumblr post, which again mentions how President Obama promised to end such bulk collection, but then saying that the administration is still seeking the next 90 day extension to keep collecting those phone records. The post even calls out the passage of the totally watered-down USA Freedom Act in the House as "prohibiting" such bulk collection (even though it doesn't really do that, since it allows broad selectors that give the NSA effectively the same power).
However...
Given that legislation has not yet been enacted, and given the importance of maintaining the capabilities of the Section 215 telephony metadata program, the government has sought a 90-day reauthorization of the existing program, as modified by the changes the President announced earlier this year.
Consistent with prior declassification decisions, in light of the significant and continuing public interest in the telephony metadata collection program, the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, has declassified the fact that the governments application to renew the program was approved yesterday by the FISC. The order issued yesterday expires on September 12, 2014.
Consistent with prior declassification decisions, in light of the significant and continuing public interest in the telephony metadata collection program, the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, has declassified the fact that the governments application to renew the program was approved yesterday by the FISC. The order issued yesterday expires on September 12, 2014.
Wait. Given what importance of maintaining the capabilities? So far, every analysis of the program has shown that it wasn't important at all. How could anyone in the administration still claim with a straight face that the Section 215 bulk phone records collection is "important" when everyone who's seen the evidence agrees that the program has been next to useless in stopping terrorism.
Either way, even though President Obama has already said that he wants the program ended, and he could do so, he's still keeping it going.
(Senators' Letter at the Link)
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140620/14522227639/senators-to-obama-hey-you-can-end-bulk-phone-data-collection-today-obama-ha-ha-ha-nope.shtml#comments
140 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Senators To Obama: Hey You Can End Bulk Phone Data Collection Today; Obama: Ha, Ha, Ha, Nope! [View all]
KoKo
Jun 2014
OP
No change will happen until Section 215 is changed by Congress. That's the bottom line, and
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#10
Exactly...he can't fix Congressional messes with EOs. Congress has to clean up 215, or this will
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#15
The argument is about the interpretation of section 215 of the Patriot Act and whether
JDPriestly
Jun 2014
#56
So, His ego and concern for what Republicans might say about him doesn't equal
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#3
No...the Constitution says that 215 must be executed, unless and until Congress
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#11
You'll forgive me if I feel Mark Udall, Ron Wyden might know a bit more about government than you.
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#16
Let me shock you with the suggestion that Politicians sometimes ask questions they
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#17
Still trying to pretend that the president's hands are merely tied, rather than
woo me with science
Jun 2014
#18
They should amend the Constitution to create some sort of "executive" position
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#28
Use 215?? That's what Wyden and Udall are talking about, woo!! 215. Here's an idea, instead
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#26
Oh lordy....look, here's a primer on how bills get passed..you know, things like the repeal of DADT
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#43
Of course the Constitution says 215 must be executed!!!! Just as any law passed must be!!
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#99
Ah, no. The president and the DOJ can refuse to defend a law they deem unconstitutional
MaggieD
Jun 2014
#121
The letter acknowledges that the recently passed House bill does not stop data collection....
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#54
Congress saying may is not the same as Congress saying must. Acting within one's discretion
TheKentuckian
Jun 2014
#88
You say this, "you are asking the President to go against the express wishes of Congress..."
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#100
The President is asking for extensions that he isnt required to ask for. That's what the
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#103
And there's the point of contention...is he required, under the duty to faithfully
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#108
That's all hogwash. The President is not required to ask for extensions. He yields his power
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#116
Thank you. The poster is trying to imply that there is a legal obligation to renew the court order,
woo me with science
Jun 2014
#20
Absurd is right "He can not protect the Constitution because the Constitution forbids it"
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#25
You do realize you aren't quoting the actual letter, right? And in the actual letter, which
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#31
All the more reason to "dry in" the roof until Congress can be pressured to do it's job by us
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#49
Yeah...that would be great except our system of government doesn't allow the
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#55
I suppose we will have to agree to disagree, I explained my position and have not been convinced
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#59
A president who claims to have taught constitutional law should know that Section 215 as the
JDPriestly
Jun 2014
#61
He doesn't have the authority to override section 215. We kinda set up the Constitution
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#8
No....they admit they want the President to use a "patchwork" approach in the absence
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#32
Um, no...see my post 95 for why he's done some modifications within his Executive
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#97
It's not just that...section 215 is going to be with us until Congress gets off its
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#7
Sounds like putting short term tactical considerations over the very fabric of the Republic and
TheKentuckian
Jun 2014
#12
We Democrats need to stop giving Congress a pass. No change can or will happen unless
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#14
Okay.....first of all, the Executive doesn't write laws. But I'm getting your
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#35
Clapper is correct...as Congress hasn't gotten off its ass and passed anything,
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#5
The national security state needs the information on its citizens, some of whom are obvious enemies.
Octafish
Jun 2014
#36
Yes they could and they should, but in the meantime any action would be helpful
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#68
Since the good is the enemy of the perfect and the perfect is the enemy of the good
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#92
No...it has to be constitutional. It's like the DADT repeal...sometimes Congress has to clean
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#98