Issue Position: Privacy and Security

Issue Position

Limiting the scope and authority of government is a central tenet of representative democracy. We can never entrust any government, no matter how well meaning, with unlimited power. The misuse of such unchecked authority leads to mistakes that are hard to correct. Ultimately, government agencies shielded from public view are subject to corruption and abuse. I reject the premise that granting the federal government unbridled surveillance powers does anything to improve our national security. We need not sacrifice either our security, our liberty, or our constitutional protection from unreasonable search.

Rein in the NSA

The National Security Agency has been running "The Program" under both the Bush and Obama Administrations. Details of this shockingly broad surveillance program are just now coming to light, and would still be secret except for the actions of Edward Snowden, an NSA contractor willing to leak the details of the operation to the press, while also turning over unknown national security secrets to foreign governments. Snowden is no hero, but his leaks have exposed an ongoing surveillance operation resting on highly questionable legal justification.

President Obama has proposed a series of small steps to curb NSA's data collection activities, but has allowed the program to continue as Congress debates the issue. Congress must pass real reform that stops the NSA's ability to collect unlimited data on innocent American citizens.

No Obama Loopholes

The President's proposal limits the NSA's bulk data collection authority outside of judicial approval, but with a mile-wide exception that allow the government to bypass the court in an unspecified "emergency situation." Limits on government that can be waived at the discretion of the government are no limits at all. All of the NSA's data collection activities, if they are ever to be used in court, must be approved by a judge, and such approval must be timely, temporary, and based on probable cause.

PRISM

The President's proposal also leaves untouched the highly controversial PRISM system, under which the NSA has collected untold numbers of emails and social networking information from companies such as Google and Facebook. Federal authorities have used techniques such as "National Security Letters" to force companies to turn over confidential client information without warrants, probable cause, or public notice. It has even prevented these companies from letting their users know that their data has been subject to search. Such unchecked abuses must end, and PRISM must be brought under legislative oversight.

End "Backdoor" Surveillance

The Patriot Act was passed, and reauthorized, as Congress sought to improve the federal government's ability to eavesdrop on foreign targets. Yet innocent Americans are subject to these same surveillance programs through "backdoor searches". In fact, the NSA can "hop" three times from legitimate target to people who have never met or heard of the target. Such a wide net could literally capture every single American, and can't possibly be justified as a reasonable search under our Constitution.

Deadlines for Destruction of Records

The NSA's collection of metadata, which includes who we call, when we call, our GPS locations when we call, and more, was meant to be temporary. But no binding rules exist for when the NSA must get rid of this data. Current legislation requires the prompt destruction of unneeded records, but leaves it the NSA to define what is unneeded, and doesn't say how long it means by "prompt". Real NSA reform would set a hard headline for the destruction of records not connected to ongoing investigations. The NSA, nor any government agency, should not be allowed to collect unlimited data on innocent Americans just in case such data might eventually prove useful.

Protect Americans from Warrantless Surveillance

The core argument for proponents of the Patriot Act and other broad surveillance authorizations is that U.S. intelligence services need such unchecked authority in order to combat the threat of international terrorism. We should not prevent the U.S. intelligence community from tracking terrorist organizations and preventing future attacks. But there is no reason that information gained through such foreign counter-terrorism programs needs to be used to prosecute American citizens. Guaranteeing that this data shall not be admissible in American courts will not interfere with the ability of our military and intelligence services to combat and prevent terrorism.

Protect the Internet for government control

Sweeping government control over the Internet, whether in the name of national security or fighting online piracy, stifles communication and competition. Such legislation, whether it's SOPA, PIPA, or CISPA, threaten Internet privacy and our civil liberties. Huge technology companies support such bills in order to prevent competition from smaller, nimbler firms. The U.S. government should not be allowed to interfere with our online activities at the request of foreign governments or big corporations. The First Amendment does not expire when we log onto the Internet

Source