USA Freedom Act of 2015

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on our country on 9/11/2001--terrorist attacks that killed some 3,000 people--I authored legislation, along with former Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission to reform and restructure the intelligence community, to improve its capabilities, and also to increase accountability and oversight.

Now, this law is different and distinct from the PATRIOT Act. Our law established the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to coordinate all of the agencies involved in intelligence gathering so that we would reduce the possibility of the dots not being connected and to allow terrorist attacks and plots to be detected and thwarted.

Our legislation also created the National Counterterrorism Center, which helps to synthesize the information across government and share it with State and local governments to help keep us safer. Our bill created the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, and it installed privacy officers in the major intelligence agencies.

But our law, the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Protection Act, shared the common goal of the PATRIOT Act of better protecting our Nation from terrorist attacks because none of us who lived through that terrible day ever wanted to see Americans die again because our Nation failed to use the tools and capabilities it had to prevent terrorist attacks.

We have had terrorist attacks since that time. The Boston Marathon is an example of a terrorist attack that occurred despite our best efforts, but we have been able to thwart and uncover and detect and stop terrorist attacks--both here and abroad--due to the important tools and capabilities our government has. Like the Presiding Officer, I serve on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. I have sat through countless hours of briefings, I have asked the hard questions about our intelligence programs, and I have challenged those who have come before us.

I wish to explain how the current program works at NSA because I believe there is so much misinformation about this important program. One of the most egregious misinformation points that have been made is that the NSA is listening to the content of calls made by American citizens to other American citizens. That is simply not true.

Let me tell you how this program works. First, it starts with a call, a phone number from a foreign terrorist or a foreign terrorist organization. When we get a foreign terrorist's--who is based overseas--telephone number, the NSA is allowed to query a database to see if that foreign-based terrorist is calling someone in our country. Why is that important? Well, we know ISIS and other terrorist groups have been recruiting Americans and trying to train them to attack our country. That is why it is important.

Only 34 highly trained, vetted Federal employees are allowed to query that database, and even then they are allowed to do so only if a Federal judge finds that a standard has been reached to allow that query to be made. Even if that query is approved by that Federal judge, the analyst can only see the phone numbers called by the terrorist, the date, the time, and the duration of the call.

If there is a match, then the case is turned over to the FBI for further investigation. The FBI must get a court order to wiretap the phone of the American who is talking to that foreign terrorist.

Last month, during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing, I asked the Attorney General whether there have ever been any privacy violations regarding that telephone data. She replied no.

I am truly perplexed that anyone would argue that telephone data are better protected in the hands of 1,400 telecom companies and 160 wireless carriers than in a secure NSA database that only 34 carefully vetted and trained employees are allowed to query under the supervision of a Federal judge.

Under the USA FREEDOM Act--the House bill--when we get the telephone number of an overseas terrorist, we potentially are going to have to go to each one of those 1,400 telecom companies, 160 wireless carriers, which potentially will involve thousands of people. The privacy implications are far greater if we have the telecoms control the data, far greater.

Moreover, we know private sector data is far more susceptible to hackers, to criminals. Look at all the breaches of sensitive data that have occurred during the past year alone. Plus, I simply don't think the system will work without a data-retention requirement now that most carriers have flat-rate telephone plans that don't require detailed call data records. The telecom companies have made very clear they will oppose any bill with a data-retention requirement, and there will be a race to the bottom to market the data in a way that says to people: Sign up with us and your data will be safe from the government.

That kind of demagoguery--even though the commerce committee has done an excellent study that shows the data broker companies sell our personal data, including our names, our phone numbers, our addresses to the highest bidder for telemarketing and other purposes, and some of that data ends up in the hands of con artists.

So I don't see how vesting the authority in the telecom communications companies increases the privacy of our data, safeguards it. I think just the opposite is the case. It is going to be less secure because it is going to be more exposed to hackers and criminals who will attempt to do data breaches and have successfully done so. It is going to be less secure because instead of 34 people having access to just the phone numbers and call duration data, we are going to have potentially thousands of people who are going to be asked to query their database. The system is going to be less effective because there is absolutely no guarantee this data will be retained by the telecom companies and the wireless carriers.

Finally, I am persuaded by the cautions given to us, by the direct warnings of former Director of the FBI Robert Mueller and the former Deputy Director of the CIA Mike Morell, who tell us that had this program been in place prior to 9/11, it is likely that terrorist plot would have been uncovered and thwarted.

The fact is the House bill substantially weakens a vital tool in our counterterrorism efforts at a time when the terrorist threat has never been higher. The current program has never been abused. The government cannot listen to your phone calls or read your emails unless there is a court order--because you are directly communicating with an overseas terrorist--and then it goes to the FBI for investigation.

It is a false choice that we have to choose between our civil liberties and keeping our country safe. There are actions we can and should take to strengthen the privacy protections in the NSA program. Several were included in the bipartisan bill reported by the Intelligence Committee last year. Unfortunately, the USA FREEDOM Act provides a false sense of privacy at the expense of our national security.

For these reasons, while I will support the amendments today to try to make modest improvements to the House bill, I simply cannot support the bill on final passage.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source