This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/senate-fails-to-advance-legislation-on-nsa-reform/2014/11/18/a72eb7fc-6f70-11e4-8808-afaa1e3a33ef_story.html?wprss=rss_national-security

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Senate fails to advance legislation on NSA reform Senate fails to advance legislation on NSA reform
(35 minutes later)
The Senate failed Tuesday evening to advance legislation on bipartisan surveillance reform, dealing a significant setback to the Obama administration’s plans to end the National Security Agency’s mass collection of Americans’ communications records.The Senate failed Tuesday evening to advance legislation on bipartisan surveillance reform, dealing a significant setback to the Obama administration’s plans to end the National Security Agency’s mass collection of Americans’ communications records.
Lawmakers fell two votes shy of the 60 necessary to proceed to a floor debate on the USA Freedom Act, which would put limits on the so-called bulk collection of Americans’ records. The NSA collection effort was revealed last year by former agency contractor Edward Snowden. Lawmakers fell two votes shy of the 60 needed to proceed to a floor debate on the USA Freedom Act, which sought to put limits on the so-called bulk collection of Americans’ records. The NSA collection effort was revealed last year by former agency contractor Edward Snowden.
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the chairman of the Judiciary Committee and a bill co-sponsor, vowed he “will not give up the fight.” Reminding senators that 13 years ago he was the target of an anthrax-laden letter that wound up killing the person who opened it, he said “fomenting fear stifles debate and constructive solutions.” Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), the chairman of the Judiciary Committee and a bill co-sponsor, vowed he “will not give up the fight.” Reminding senators that 13 years ago he was the target of an anthrax-laden letter that killed the person who opened it, he said “fomenting fear stifles debate and constructive solutions.”
Leahy has not ruled trying again in the lame-duck session, an aide said, such as by attaching the bill to other legislation that is moving. Leahy has not ruled out trying again in the lame-duck session, an aide said, such as by attaching the bill to other legislation that is moving.
If Congress does not act now, it will face a June 1 expiration of a key provision of the USA Patriot Act, which enables the intelligence community to gather data for counterterrorism purposes. Section 215 allows the government to obtain data from companies using individual, targeted orders for each suspect under court oversight. If Congress does not act now, it will face a June 1 expiration of a key provision of the USA Patriot Act that enables the intelligence community to gather data for counterterrorism purposes. Section 215 allows the government to obtain specific records relevant to particular investigations. But, as Snowden disclosed, it also was the authority cited by the government to enable the NSA to collect data in bulk. Reform advocates want to end that bulk collection but in general maintain the government’s ability to issue targeted orders for data.
But, as Snowden disclosed, it was also the authority cited by the government to enable the NSA to collect data in bulk. Reform advocates want to end the bulk collection but maintain the government’s ability to issue targeted orders for data. They believe that the national security community’s desire to preserve that ability will force them to compromise and pass legislation that halts the mass harvesting of data. The Tuesday vote exposed fissures in the GOP over the legislation, with national security-oriented members and a vocal privacy proponent, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), voting to block the bill — but for different reasons.
The Tuesday vote surfaced fissures in the GOP over the legislation, with national security-oriented members and a vocal privacy proponent, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), voting to block the bill—but for different reasons.
Paul, a likely presidential candidate, opposed USA Freedom because he said it does not go far enough to limit surveillance powers.Paul, a likely presidential candidate, opposed USA Freedom because he said it does not go far enough to limit surveillance powers.
Incoming Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a fellow Kentucky senator, also opposed the bill, but for the opposite reason: it went too far, he said, in constraining the U.S. intelligence community. Incoming Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a fellow Kentucky senator, also opposed the bill, but for the opposite reason: It went too far, he said, in constraining the U.S. intelligence community.
“This is the worst possible time to be tying our hands behind our backs. The threat from ISIL is real,” McConnell said in a floor statement earlier Tuesday, using a different name to refer to the Islamic State. “This is the worst possible time to be tying our hands behind our backs. The threat from ISIL is real,” McConnell said in a floor statement earlier Tuesday, using one of several names for the Islamic State.
And four GOP senators voted in favor of advancing to debate, including Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), who also is a potential presidential candidate. And four GOP senators voted in favor of advancing to debate — among them Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.), who also is a potential presidential candidate.
The bill would require the NSA to end its bulk collection of data about Americans’ communications -- call times, dates and durations, but not content --and instead force it to request specific data from phone companies. The government would need to show it had reasonable articulable suspicion that the number it is interested in is tied to a foreign terrorist organization. The bill would require the NSA to end its bulk collection of data about Americans’ communications and instead require it to request specific data from phone companies. The agency now collects call times, dates and durations of calls but not the content of calls. The government would need to show it had reasonable, articulable suspicion that the number it is interested in is tied to a foreign terrorist organization or individual.
It would also require the federal surveillance court to appoint a panel of public advocates who can advance legal positions in support of privacy and civil liberties, and would expand company reporting to the public on the scope of government requests for customers’ data. It would also require the federal surveillance court to appoint a panel of public advocates to advance legal positions in support of privacy and civil liberties, and would expand company reporting to the public on the scope of government requests for customers’ data.
The failure to pass legislation before next year could pose hurdles for the GOP.The failure to pass legislation before next year could pose hurdles for the GOP.
“They have all these grand plans -all these things that they want to accomplish,” said another Senate aide, referring to McConnell’s desire to achieve an ambitious agenda in his first 100 days as majority leader. “If they get stuck in intraparty quagmires on this and stuck up against a sunset with the prospect of losing a major national security tool, it’s a conundrum.” “They have all these grand plans — all these things that they want to accomplish,” said another Senate aide, referring to McConnell’s desire to achieve an ambitious agenda in his first 100 days as majority leader. “If they get stuck in intraparty quagmires on this and stuck up against a sunset with the prospect of losing a major national security tool, it’s a conundrum.”
It will be a challenge as well for the administration, which supported the bill. “There’s a worry about being boxed in next year,” said one U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak for the record. The concern is the debate will get pushed to the last minute — just before the Patriot Act provisions expire. It will be a challenge as well for the administration, which supported the bill. “There’s a worry about being boxed in next year,” said one U.S. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak for the record. The concern is that the debate will get pushed to the last minute — just before the Patriot Act provisions expire.
“If you wait to the last minute,” he said, “that does not lead to good policy.” “If you wait to the last minute,” the official said, “that does not lead to good policy.”
The House passed its own version of USA Freedom in May, but it did not win the backing of privacy advocates. A modified bill that addressed most privacy concerns emerged in the Senate this past summer after lengthy negotiations among intelligence agencies, the White House, lawmakers and their aides and privacy advocates. The House passed its own version of USA Freedom in May, but it did not win the backing of privacy advocates. A modified bill that addressed most privacy concerns emerged in the Senate this summer after lengthy negotiations among intelligence agencies, the White House, lawmakers and their aides and privacy advocates.
The bill ended up with the support of the Obama administration, including the director of national intelligence and attorney general, as well as many tech companies and a diverse range of groups from the National Rifle Association to the American Civil Liberties Union. The bill ended up with the support of the Obama administration, including the director of national intelligence and attorney general, as well as many tech companies and a diverse range of groups including the National Rifle Association and the American Civil Liberties Union.