Thursday, May 22, 2014

House passes watered down NSA reform bill

Link to Article

This article is about the new National Secuity Agency (NSA) reform bill that was passed on Thursday.  This new bill is a bit controversial.  The biggest change to the bill is the tweaked language defining who or what the NSA is allowed to monitor. The bill was altered to greatly expand that definition.  The amended bill leaves the list of potential search terms open-ended by adding the phrase "such as" -- it says NSA searches must be tied to "a discrete term, such as a term specifically identifying a person, entity, account, address, or device."  The White House put out a statement of support for the finalized bill, saying the legislation "ensures our intelligence and law enforcement professionals have the authorities they need to protect the Nation, while further ensuring that individuals' privacy is appropriately protected when these authorities are employed."  This relates to AP GoPo because it deals with our fourth amendment rights.  

Personally I think this is a bunch of bologna, but then again I'm a believer in most conspiracy theories so it could just be me being crazy.  However, I do believe this is walking a fine line between being constitutional and obstructing our fourth amendment rights.  I think there is no way possible to use one term that specifically identifies a person.  Furthermore, I think that this doesn't help to protect the Nation, but rather creates an even more blind society that has no idea whats going on behind closed doos in their government.  In my opinon there is a lot we don't know that the government hides from us and most of it is crazy insane things you would never imagine are possible.  While some may say some things are better left kept secret, I say ignorance is not bliss.

1 comment:

  1. After reading this, I am a little concerned about the elastic language used in the bill. I feel like that was okay with the founding fathers when they wrote the constitution. They had a lot to plan and not much time to do it. That language is part of what has defined our country. However, today we have the resources to plan out exactly what we want to say in legislation. Vague language really isn't necessary.

    ReplyDelete