11 ms·
Senate leadership pushing a surveillance bill as Americans focused on Covid-19
- inetknght 7y agoI hope all ya'lls VPNs to work are secure. It would be unfortunate if, thanks to a misguided government requirement to not be, your only way to work remotely were compromised.
- o-__-o 7y agoCivil disobedience.
- brenden2 7y agoThe government has a history of taking advantage of panic and fear to pass egregious legislation. Another famous example is the Patriot act, passed during the height of "terrorism" hysteria.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- throwaway_Bees 7y agoDon't forget about the corporate welfare. 2008 resulting in 2 bailouts totaling nearly $2T for the banks. At a time when American's are staying home and not being paid, Trump is continuing to focus on the stock market. He will soon pass a nearly $1T bailout for businesses...American workers will be lucky to see a single check in the next 2-4 weeks.
- ilikehurdles 7y agoIt will be tough times for workers and their Social Security funds, and bailouts for the employers who used their last round of giveaway money on stock buybacks.
- ta1234567890 7y agoAnd that is only for big businesses that are listed in the stock exchanges. All other businesses are left to struggle on their own. Thousands of small businesses are going to have to shut down for good.
- throwaway_Bees 7y agoBillions will be poured into the SBA, so they can claim billions went to small businesses, but that money will all be given to businesses with political connections. And they will never mention those thousands of small businesses you reference that will go under, just like politicians never once spoke of American's who lost their homes and became homeless, instead mentioning only the banks problems.
- artificial 7y agoI'm not a fan of the banks, they were encouraged to loan to risky borrowers, people who bought as much as they could with little more than a pulse. This behavior began under Clinton. This was during the era of easy credit where college kids could get massive credit lines. Source: I was one of these kids and I also worked for a Real Estate Web host during the boom and bust.
- throwaway_Bees 7y ago>I'm not a fan of the banks, they were encouraged to loan to risky borrowers, people who bought as much as they could with little more than a pulse. There is so much to unpack in this sentence, this alone could be a book about the financial/housing collapse. Yes, in Clinton's years the banks lobbied and successfully had regulations rolled back so they could underwrite loans on stated income from broker applications. For purposes of culpability/intent, look no further than these lobbying efforts (I am skipping the other deregulations they successfully lobbied for: 103% financing/nothing down/adjustable rate mortgages). With these new rules its fair to say banks encouraged brokers to in turn encourage borrowers to make up numbers because now they would not be verified. When it all blew up, the banks blamed the borrowers for lying on mortgage applications, making themselves out to be the victims.
- kortilla 7y agoBanks only got loans in the crisis, not free money. Let me see if I understand the thought process by this propaganda. Extra loans for unemployed people isn’t really palatable so we use the word “bailout” to make it sound like free money so we can advocate for handouts. Is that right?
- miked85 7y agoWhy do you put "terrorism" in quotes? It was/is most definitely a real thing.
- izzydata 7y agoPossibly suggesting that countering terrorism was not the real goal.
- FDSGSG 7y agoIt's never terrorism when the US government murders civilians. Clearly murdering civilians is simply an accepted practice at this point, and not "terrorism".
- ruskimir 7y agoПриветствую, товарищ.
- kortilla 7y agoIn your world does intent matter?
- FDSGSG 7y agoDoes intent matter when the US government actively resists investigations into war crimes perpetrated its fighters? Does intent matter when the US leadership pardons convicted war criminals?
- chance_state 7y agoWhy dodge the question?
- FDSGSG 7y agoWhether or not intent matters in my world is utterly irrelevant, clearly intent doesn't matter when it comes to the US govt.
- leftyted 7y agoThere's another side to this story. Americans demand this kind of action during emergencies. The widely accepted idea that the government is capable of protecting us from events like this is tacit acknowledgement of the government's right to closely monitor society. To put it another way: as soon as you start blaming the government for a terrorist attack (or something), you are rather close to condoning government surveillance of the citizenry (or whatever extreme measure).
- pdelbarba 7y agoSure, however this case in particular is a bit of a counter point because covid-19 isn't causing anyone to become a child predator, nor has there otherwise been a recent tidal wave of child predators that appeared out of thin air. Seems they pushed the bill off for a bit but this whole thing was introduced at an odd time.
- keiferski 7y agoI would say that the people demand action of some kind, not necessarily action that violates civil rights. A wise leader would know how to satisfy the populace without sacrificing liberty in the process.
- clairity 7y agoyes to action, not surveillance. but i remember the patriot act having lots of popular support (but not from me). it still makes me mad thinking about it. police powers (internally delegated coercive power) are largely the domain of states and localities, not the federal government (who's responsible for externally targeted force), along with an FBI that's limited to federal concerns, like interstate commerce and crimes against the federal government. citizens need to be ever vigilant about maintaining those distinctions.
- rdiddly 7y agoI feel obliged to mention that this assumes a correlation between surveillance and protection.
- aquabeagle 7y agoWhich was largely written by Joe Biden in 1995 after the Oklahoma City bombing. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/andrewkaczynski/surveillance-joe https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/andrewkaczynski/surveil...
- Anon1096 7y agoThis "dangerous surveillance bill" is the status quo. Not to say that it is acceptable, but please realize that there's no new powers being granted, just old ones being renewed that expired this week. Also, are we really allowing articles from Common Dreams now?
- iamnothere 7y agoIt may be the status quo, but since these powers were intended to be temporary, it is arguably relevant that they may finally be expiring. Many users here care about issues around surveillance and privacy. Re: Common Dreams, HN guidelines don't limit sources by their political slant, as long as the article in question is interesting or relevant. Frankly I find this to be refreshing, since many places are dominated by articles from sources with a center-right slant.
- darkarmani 7y ago> just old ones being renewed that expired this week. Aren't they supposed to expire, otherwise why have it sunset? The status-quo is that they were limited powers.
- jtbayly 7y agoSo, the vote was supposed to be last night. Did it happen? Did it pass?
- rodion_89 7y agoThey instead extended it for 77 days due to COVID-19. Basically punting for now
- pythonaut_16 7y agoSo literally the opposite of what the headline is implying.
- ruskimir 7y agoPutin's chef calls this the St Petersburg Special.
- jfengel 7y agoNo, it's correct. These are powers that already exist. The bill is to renew it. Parts were to expire; the bill extends them. That did not pass yet, but they did vote to keep them for a few months. If the headline is inapt, it's in implying that the bill is something new. And that this is happening now to hide it, rather than because the existing bill's sunset clauses are coming up.
- pythonaut_16 7y agoSo if I understand you correctly, they voted to extend these (existing) powers short term, and will have another vote later on whether to keep them long term. The headline seems to imply congress is trying to sneak something by while everyone is distracted, rather than maintaining the status quo temporarily. There's enough to be concerned with congress without being misleading. Framing everything Congress does as some conspiracy theory only dilutes the response when actually shady things are happening.
- 7y ago
- anoplus 7y agoThe Coronavirus crisis is a perfect opportunity for governments to take totalitarian leaps forward. Look what happened this week in Israel. At 1:00AM when citizens were sleeping: https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2020/03/14/coronavirus-spy-apps-israel-joins-iran-and-china-tracking-citizens-smartphones-to-fight-covid-19/#6a50639781bb https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2020/03/14/coronavir... Edit: I would also want to point out the prime minister trial supposed to begin today(!) and was delayed to May because the courts were closed as "non crucial" service. He has been indicted for bribe, fraud and breach of trust.
- fierarul 7y agoWasn't there some news days ago about a cyclist being on the suspect list of a burglary because he was cycling on the street next to a house and the app he was using was taking location data from Google? US government could just order Google / Apple push an update to their OSes thereby making location data always on then gather the data and do contact tracing. A lot of people would actually self-subscribe to a Google Contact Tracing app if they are instantly notified about crossing paths with an infected person.
- artificial 7y agoThey wouldn't even need to go that far. As long as the phone is talking to the tower its position is known. Perhaps a rise in mesh networks with non cellular devices will be a thing?
- kortilla 7y agoNot a very good position though (can be hundreds of feet off), so it depends on what you want to do with that data.
- Retric 7y agoFor a single data point it’s not that accurate but over time things change. How many people are within 500 feet of you for 4+ hours a day. In that mindset, building a model to track say every person on a tour bus seems rather straightforward. Even locating people likely to be having an affair seems doable if you have some basic biographic info on the general population.
- ropiwqefjnpoa 7y ago"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste."
- jb775 7y agoWhat is this quote from?
- marklgr 7y agoChurchill, IIRC.
- lukifer 7y agoRahm Emanuel, Chief of Staff to Barack Obama: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Rahm_Emanuel https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Rahm_Emanuel
- ComputerGuru 7y agoAnd until last year, mayor of Chicago. You can guess how he’s have capitalized on this, I suppose.
- lilott8 7y agoI know Rahm Emmanuel was caught using on a hot mic at some conference.
- forkexec 7y agoThe majority of the US Senate is a threat to the world, peace, liberties, and people.
- rolltiide 7y agoWell at this rate the entire country will be blue this time next year and the representatives will be half their current age. It's kind of silly to just let everyone else come to the conclusion independently and just not say it yet.
- FooBarWidget 7y agoHow does that work? Isn't the senate elected?
- ruskimir 7y agoRussian troll site.
- ruskimir 7y agoHow's the weather there in St Petersburg?
- suzakus 7y agoAny source on your claim that this is a Russian troll site? https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/common-dreams/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/common-dreams/, and they're a registed 501c3.
- ruskimir 7y agoI can create a fake website verifying anything as true as well, doesn't change the facts.
- o-__-o 7y agoThats not what it means to being a 501(c)(3). You can simply look at where their income is derived to tell if they have russian influence. https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/public-disclosure-and-availability-of-exempt-organizations-returns-and-applications-documents-subject-to-public-disclosure https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/public-disclosure-...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- tathougies 7y agoThe article neglects to mention that the bill already passed the democratic house without much debate. The President of the United States wants the Senate bill to remove powers given to the executive branch, because he's convinced they were used against him. Yes, that's right, the president of the United States wants the Senate to amend the bill to reduce the power of the executive branch. In other words, by characterizing this bill as something Senate republicans are trying to do to increase the power of the federal government, the article neglects to mention that (a) the bill has already passed the Democrat-led house (sponsored by Adam Schiff, BTW) and (b) that the head of the Republican party, the POTUS, wants more restrictions on the powers they're giving to him. That would certainly change the headline, but wouldn't satisfy people's republican bashing appetite. https://www.usnews.com/news/technology/articles/2020-03-16/us-senate-votes-to-extend-surveillance-tools-for-77-days https://www.usnews.com/news/technology/articles/2020-03-16/u...
- suyash 7y agothanks for sharing that insight, I hate articles that only report their biased point of view and hide other relevant information.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- tobramycin 7y ago"The Act passed the House late last week, but with significant bipartisan opposition from civil-liberties champions in Congress and from leading privacy, racial-justice and constitutional-rights groups, including my group Free Press Action." This is the second paragraph of the article.
- tathougies 7y agoCorrect, but it still passed a chamber of the legislature headed by the opposition party. Hell, it was sponsored by a legislator that is so convinced the current head of state is a criminal that he led an impeachment investigation against him. It indicates a severe lack of integrity when one sponsors a bill meant to give rather extreme authoritarian powers to someone you have decided is a criminal.
- maerF0x0 7y agosee also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine
- jdp23 7y agoGood news: due to strong pushback, they've dropped this proposal, and just did a straightforward short-term extension -- https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/16/senate-short-term-extension-spy-programs-132401 https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/16/senate-short-term-e...
- dang 7y agoOk, we've changed the URL to that from https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/03/16/senate-leadership-pushing-through-dangerous-surveillance-bill-americans-are-focused https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/03/16/senate-leaders....
- DubiousPusher 7y agoHere is the email I am sending my Senators. Feel free to copy and modify for your own use. Hello Senator _________. I'm writing you today to ask you to oppose the USA Freedom Reauthorization Act of 2020. I have written in the past to ask you to oppose other extraordinary security measures that have been maintained since the aftermath of Sept. 11 2001. I repeatedly write and request this because it is my opinion that these programs are contrary to the 4th amendment protections that are unalienable to all Americans. And these programs are administered in secret. Any program maintained in secret runs the risk of operating contrary to the public interest. This is because a citizen's most significant recourse is to vote for or against representatives who authorize government action. Any secret government action is therefore unable to be valued by a voter and therefor operates entirely outside public opinion. I understand that some programs need to be shielded from public opinion for security reasons. But that need for security must be weighed against the need for a republican form of government to be transparent with its citizens. With each passing year that the public entrusts that government with secrecy the burden to justify it should become heavier. So I ask you to oppose this measure. At the very least I would ask that as our representatives to government you will require that these programs justify their need by releasing some specific information to the public about the benefit they have had. I know that our intelligence agencies have opposed giving specifics examples of benefit. They claim to do so would reveal important sources or techniques. But with all due respect, we have given them the benefit of the doubt for nearly two decades now. Surely there is something significant they can share from years gone by that will not be too damaging to their operations. Thank you.
- YPCrumble 7y agoThank you for sharing!
- nostromo 7y agoThis does seem similar to many bad laws that were passed after 9/11, usually with support of both parties. Even decades after 9/11 many of those bad laws are still with us. Shockingly, the very broad authorization of military force from 2001 is still the law of the land: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_of_2001 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Milit... It's important to be diligent and not get distracted by a crisis. All emergency measures should have sunset clauses.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- SkyBelow 7y ago>All emergency measures should have sunset clauses. I wonder if all laws should have sunset clauses. Even with as simple as murder there are needs for the legislature to discuss if the penalty is appropriate based on current science of rehabilitation and the edge cases like vehicular homicide handled in the correct fashion.
- Armisael16 7y agoI would say that’s already functionally the case with the debt ceiling, and that’s a catastrophe every time it comes up.
- SkyBelow 7y agoI guess the problem with with riders and such. If someone adds their own pork to the keep murder illegal bill, it could cause issues. But I think that is a case of pork being the problem, as it also causes issues with many other sorts of bills.
- lozenge 7y agoNot really, a sunset clause on the debt ceiling would mean after sunset there would be no ceiling, as it is a completely artificial invention anyway. Most countries don't have a debt ceiling.
- throwayzz- 7y agoI think it's really creepy to have so many people thinking that n.s.a or c.i.a actually care about this bu"sh!t
- wiseleo 7y agoMade my call
- ck2 7y agoCorporate media is being completely silent on this or have I missed any coverage?
- williesleg 7y agoTypical fake news directly from the Chinese source.
- the_watcher 7y agoWhile I almost certainly agree with the OP on surveillance overall, it seems like this bill doesn't actually change the status quo in any negative direction? It seems to mostly preserve a status quo that already contains all of this.