"I don't want to be painted as anti-privacy and I would say that I'm not, but the principal goal of this legislation is not to send your data to the NSA" This

"I don't want to be painted as anti-privacy and I would say that I'm not, but the principal goal of this legislation is not to send your data to the NSA" This is what folks with this argument are missing - it doesn't matter one bit what the goal of legislation is, especially when it involves immunity for very vague things. Just because you will use it for that, does not prevent someone else from abusing it now or in the future. The point of legislation should be to protect the people. Just like the author of the Patriot Act never intended for it to be abused the way it was. And these things are extraordinarily difficult to curtail after the fact. "Sensenbrenner supported the Amash Amendment, a plan to defund the NSA's telephone surveillance program. "Never, he said, did he intend to allow the wholesale vacuuming up of domestic phone records, nor did his legislation envision that data dragnets would go beyond specific targets of terrorism investigations." The Amendment fell seven votes short of the number it needed to pass." Also, I don't really buy that businesses are limited by their inability to share threat information, because they have been doing this for years.