Housing for the 21st Century Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the sweeping surveillance powers authorized under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA, expire in just 40 days.

Section 702 grew out of a secret, warrantless surveillance program conducted by the Bush administration after 9/11. When this illegal spying program was finally discovered, Congress enacted 702 as a temporary measure--a temporary measure. Like so many expansive government powers that are adopted during times of emergency, this authority has now become a fixture of our surveillance architecture.

When it comes to collecting intelligence on foreigners located abroad, the value of this tool is not in serious dispute, but there is a fatal flaw at the core of section 702. This authority is also used for warrantless spying on innocent Americans. Americans' private emails, phone calls, and text messages with friends, family, colleagues, business, and any number of other contacts around the world are swept up under section 702. The government then searches these private communications--protected by the Fourth Amendment, I might add--without a warrant or other court order.

Congress has repeatedly failed to fix this end run around the Constitution. As a result, for years, the intelligence community has abused section 702 to spy on business and religious leaders, political parties, campaign donors, journalists, and protesters across the political spectrum.

In passing the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act in April 2024, Congress codified new reforms intended to rein in these abuses. These measures have substantially reduced the number of unlawful searches.

But Congress failed to require a warrant for searching American communications--once again, leaving the fox guarding the henhouse.

At the same time, Congress greatly expanded 702 to include counternarcotics and immigration vetting, and conscripted a shocking array of American businesses into section 702 spying.

Congress has a responsibility to protect our national security and the privacy and civil liberties of Americans. That is why Senator Lee, Republican of Utah, and I have introduced the SAFE Act, a bipartisan bill that would reauthorize 702 with commonsense reforms to protect our privacy as individuals.

Our bill preserves the core values of 702 as a foreign intelligence collection tool, while preventing the government from using it to target the constitutionally protected communications of Americans, unless they get court approval.

Our warrant requirement takes legitimate operational and security needs into account so that it won't be unduly burdensome or impede any action in an emergency. There is an exception for emergencies.

What it would do is stop the government from accessing the private communications of Americans without a proper basis under the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. Such a simple requirement to comply with the Constitution should have been included in section 702 from the outset.

The SAFE Act would also prevent government Agencies--like ICE, Customs and Border Protection, and the FBI and others--from skirting the Fourth Amendment to obtain Americans' sensitive information and other personal details from data brokers.

ICE is using this data to track U.S. citizens exercising their First Amendment right to protest, which should concern Senators on both sides of the aisle.

If the FBI wants to track someone's phone, obtain their location information, or access their Google search history, the Agency should be required to get a judicial warrant.

Instead, government Agencies are exploiting gaps in our outdated laws to buy our sensitive information from data brokers. It is a loophole that Congress must address. Our bill--my bill with Senator Lee--does that.

Once again, however, those who want to avoid real reforms are urging Congress to just reauthorize section 702 without addressing this issue.

When Congress extended 702 in 2024, the argument was that we needed more time. So Congress reauthorized section 702 for just 2 years to see how the existing compliance measures were working.

``Later,'' they said. ``We need more time. . . . Let's see how the reforms are working.''

Now, here we are, 2 years later, and the opponents of real reform are saying exactly the same thing: Just give us more time.

We have been hearing these same excuses for over 20 years. It is time to stop avoiding the issue and to protect Americans' constitutional rights once and for all--not later, not next time.

In 2024, the last time section 702 was up for reauthorization, I chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee, which had jurisdiction over FISA. I held a public hearing more than 6 months before the authority expired so Members could ask the Biden administration how they were using section 702.

Now, the Trump administration refuses to testify publicly about how they are using this power.

Enough is enough. There is no excuse for ramming through an extension of 702 at the last minute without regular order and without common sense and in violation of the Constitution.

The American people deserve better from their representatives. They can and they should protect the American people from threats to their security and threats to their civil liberties.

H.R. 6644

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, today, I am voting in favor of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act. Whether they are renting or buying, too many Americans struggle with the cost of housing. This bill includes crucial reforms to streamline and enhance housing programs, as well as important incentives for communities to build high quality, affordable housing for all. I am also proud that this legislation includes my bipartisan VA Home Loan Awareness Act and VALID Act to help more veterans and their families secure affordable home loans.

We have much more work to do to deliver affordable housing to the American people, but this bipartisan legislation is a step forward. We need to examine ways to increase investment in housing supply and improve financing options, as well as expand vouchers to directly assist families. There are also different perspectives on how this legislation's treatment of ``build-to-rent'' housing could affect housing supply and prices. Accordingly, we must closely monitor housing markets to ensure those provisions support housing affordability appropriately and make adjustments if circumstances warrant. I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to increase the production of affordable housing communities need.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source