A surprise came this June that the government is using the Patriot Act to require phone companies to turn over their data on Americans. Then, a day later, a larger surprise came when we found out about PRISM, a mega-data program collecting our personal information from Internet companies.
Phone companies ordered to allow access to their information to the National Security Agency apparently include Verizon, AT&T, CenturyLink and BellSouth. Data said to be collected includes which telephone numbers are dialing which numbers, when dialed, how long the call took, and what location they are made from and to.
Service providers ordered to deliver data to NSA (and the FBI) apparently include Google, Apple, Microsoft, Yahoo, AOL, Facebook, Twitter, Skype and YouTube. Data said to be collected includes emails, chats, blogs, documents, photos, videos, cell phone GPS signals and connection logs.
And we used to think the IRS had too much of our information. This feels like George Orwell and Aldous Huxley rolled into one scary sci-fi scenario.
Talking points for supporters of the NSA surveillance program as it stands now include: — It has done great good in helping prevent and/or disrupt terrorist events in America and other countries around the world. Terrorists want to repeat 9/11 and we have to do whatever it takes to stop that from happening. These programs only work when done in secrecy.
— The 21st century war is different and requires new ways and methods of gathering information. Our government will do the right thing. Both programs are authorized by law and overseen by Congress and the courts, subject to oversight. There is no violation of the Constitution.
President Obama says, “You can’t have 100 percent security and also have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience. We’re going to have to make some choices as a society.”
Talking points for those opposed to the NSA surveillance programs as they stand now include: — Most Americans appreciate our government’s vigorous pursuit of terrorists. There is no question that we all want and expect our government to keep us safe.
One issue hinges around the possibility of our security goals being realized by less intrusive means, perhaps without harming our basic civil rights and democratic freedoms. Shouldn’t it be possible to be both safe and free?
— Not everyone believes the government will always do the right thing, for historical reasons. Having nothing to hide or feel guilty about in our daily lives doesn’t necessarily mean we want to lose our constitutional privacy and freedom.
Another issue: Is there enough oversight, enough protection or controls to make sure the government can’t misuse our information? Having good faith isn’t enough.
Two members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark Udall of Colorado, have been raising warnings. They say an enormous gap exists between what the Patriot Act law allows and what the government interprets it as meaning, making it nearly impossible for an informed public debate. At issue is the interpretation of Section 215, once called the Library Records Provision.
The senators have called for more disclosure on how the phone surveillance is run. “The American people must be given the opportunity to evaluate the facts about this program and its broad scope for themselves, so that this debate can begin in earnest.”
As it turns out, it’s most likely that Congress will be the source to compel transparency. Once again, more pressure could be of help there from frustrated constituents.
It’s still early in the game; lots of lawsuits and lots of players involved coming forward. It’s important not to surrender to the old belief that there is no changing the powers that be. Let’s try not to lose our sense of what’s acceptable and what’s not.
— Contact columnist Marylin Olds at marylin.olds@gmail.com.
