Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 243 posts

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#151

Post by AnthonyMouse »

twoodfin wrote: post #110
jrochkind1 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the argument that it couldn't require a warrant. The argument is simply that the executive branch has a constitutional right to wiretap without a warrant, unless the the constitution forbids it? There is some judicial oversight in the FISA court of course. What's the argument for why congress can legislate that, but not a more typical warrant?

For the same reason Congress can’t require the President to get the approval of the Supreme Court before he vetoes a bill: Our Constitution gives powers to the executive that cannot be usurped or overruled by Congress, notably in this context to conduct the national defense and foreign affairs. The FISA court exists to ensure that the executive is not operating outside his Constitutional authority, not as a gatekeepe…

> Our Constitution gives powers to the executive that cannot be usurped or overruled by Congress, notably in this context to conduct the national defense and foreign affairs.

This is not true. The constitution explicitly reserves the power to declare war or enact treaties to Congress. Neither the military nor federal law enforcement can spend a single dime, or even exist, without Congressional approval. If the budget allocates no money to mass surveillance, no money is available to conduct mass surveillance.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#152

Post by soraminazuki »

13of40 wrote: post #132
twoodfin wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not complicated: If you run a telegraph wire between El Paso and Juárez, the executive has the Constitutional authority to tap it to intercept communication to or from a non-citizen not in the United States, warrant-free. Congress can regulate the process that must be followed, the documentation that must be made, even require judicial review at the program level to ensure it doesn’t also record traffic that…

Not to nitpick too hard here, but you can't know whether I'm talking to a US citizen without first eavesdropping on the conversation.

That's actually a great point. After the Snowden revelations, politicians justified some of the surveillance programs by claiming they were only looking at the metadata, not the content, as if that made any difference. So that's one of the excuses they use to create the appearance of legality.

https://www.npr.org/2013/06/21/193578367/calling-it-metadata...

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#153

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #3

Does anyone want to suggest some reasons why, the one thing that D+R always, always, always agree on is this: US Gov/LEO/IC must be gifted the most power possible to surveil Americans who are not suspected of a crime

The F in FISA stands for foreign.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#154

Post by alexpotato »

jedberg wrote: post #32

What's most interesting is that this wasn't on party lines. The yes/no mix is very mixed party-wise. https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1...

A couple years ago I stumbled upon this YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qz27n1tNNMg

The summary is this:

- Votes in the House and Senate used to be anonymous

- They then decided to make them public under the reasoning of transparency

- One side effect of making them public is that you got people like Grover Norquist and The Americans for Tax Reform who could see who voted for taxes and then use that to "name and shame" people (there was a pledge signing in there as well). For more details see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover_Norquist

- This now means that it's MUCH easier for lobbyists and special interest groups to see where to spend their money as a Senator's voting history is public knowledge (which both sides are WELL aware of)

- As a sibling poster points out: you can easily see who receives money from defense groups vs not.

- This is probably good for us as voters in the short term but bad for the country in the long term (Due to the above)

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#155

Post by idiotsecant »

alexpotato wrote: post #154
jedberg wrote: post #32

What's most interesting is that this wasn't on party lines. The yes/no mix is very mixed party-wise. https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1...

A couple years ago I stumbled upon this YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qz27n1tNNMg The summary is this: - Votes in the House and Senate used to be anonymous - They then decided to make them public under the reasoning of transparency - One side effect of making them public is that you got people like Grover Norquist and The Americans for Tax Reform who could see who voted for taxes and then use that to…

I'm not convinced that this is a problem. Lobbyists and special interests already knew how politicians voted, they just knew via old fashioned grapevine methods. There was an information asymmetry between well connected lobbyists and average people. The fact that no longer exists is a good thing, in the long and short term.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#156

Post by artificialLimbs »

sapphicsnail wrote: post #147
Gud wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how it works in the USA, not necessarily how it works. Other forms of governing exists. A big step forward for the USA would be a vast reduction of federal power over the states.

How would that help? Political parties operate in states. States are banning books and outlawing abortions too.

States are not printing billions of dollars and shipping it overseas or wholesale spying on their populace for the purpose of political manipulation.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#157

Post by jiggawatts »

e40 wrote: post #103
soraminazuki wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree with the sentiment, but spying capabilities have been abused before FISA, just ask Martin Luther King Jr. So I don't think things were particularly fine before 9/11 either. It's just that technological advancements have made abuse on a mass scale possible for the first time in human history. AFAICT surveillance used to be much more targeted and labor intensive. That all changed after 9/11.

I didn't downvote you, btw (I upvoted you). I think MLK Jr's problems with the government weren't traditional spying, they were more harassment of government employees acting on their own because they were bigots. The organized government actions that did happen, IIRC, were in places were the local government was highly corrupt and infiltrated by the KKK.

“Apart from the widespread abuse of government power, there was no abuse.”

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#158

Post by twoodfin »

soraminazuki wrote: post #124
twoodfin wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To get that you have two choices: Do your best to persuade your fellow citizens to elect a President who will choose to forego this part of his Constitutional powers—or get a Constitutional amendment passed. What I keep trying to explain is that this FISA vote can’t address your concerns one way or the other. If you disagree, I wish you’d explain how.

The Constitution grants the president unlimited spying powers? That's news to me. Whether the FISA vote can fix all the problems isn't the point. The problem is that current surveillance practices looks illegal to begin with.

Intercepting communications between US persons and foreign non-citizens isn’t “unlimited spying powers” and is not illegal.

Do you disagree?

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#159

Post by cryptonector »

pessimizer wrote: post #83
Gud wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how it works in the USA, not necessarily how it works. Other forms of governing exists. A big step forward for the USA would be a vast reduction of federal power over the states.

Other countries don't institutionalize the two-party system by law. Because it would be insane and antidemocratic to create a complicated network of laws that would have to be eliminated state by state in order to ordain that an entire country must be ruled by two intimately-linked private clubs in turn.

The two-party system isn't so heavily institutionalized "by law". The law generally gives advantages to parties that pull in more than x% of the vote, and it so happens that the first-past-the-post system of electing representatives makes it very difficult for a third party to take root.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#160

Post by twoodfin »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #151
twoodfin wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the same reason Congress can’t require the President to get the approval of the Supreme Court before he vetoes a bill: Our Constitution gives powers to the executive that cannot be usurped or overruled by Congress, notably in this context to conduct the national defense and foreign affairs. The FISA court exists to ensure that the executive is not operating outside his Constitutional authority, not as a gatekeepe…

> Our Constitution gives powers to the executive that cannot be usurped or overruled by Congress, notably in this context to conduct the national defense and foreign affairs. This is not true. The constitution explicitly reserves the power to declare war or enact treaties to Congress. Neither the military nor federal law enforcement can spend a single dime, or even exist, without Congressional approval. If the budget…

Yes, Congress can defund the FBI, NSA, DIA, … or simply forbid them from spending money on foreign surveillance.

What they can’t do is allow them to spend money on foreign surveillance, but only if an Article 3 court gives them a warrant.

Post reply on HN