logo

Congress Quietly Passes Bill Allowing Feds Unlimited Access to Your Private Communications

image
Created: 11 December, 2014
Updated: 15 October, 2022
3 min read
On Wednesday, December 10, Congress passed a bill called the "Intelligence Authorization Act for 2015." Not very many people have heard of this bill, much less its passage since the media's main focus is on the CIA torture report. However, the Act contains language that U.S. Representative Justin Amash (R-Mich)

calls "the most egregious sections of law" he has encountered during his time in Congress.

"It grants the executive branch virtually unlimited access to the communications of every American," Amash explains. 

H.R. 4681, the "Intelligence Authorization Act for 2015," was introduced in May and authorizes appropriations for the government's intelligence agencies and intelligence-related activities for FY 2014-2015. This includes the activities of all federal intelligence, defense, law enforcement, and security agencies and departments. The bill initially passed the House 345-59.

On Tuesday, the Senate passed the bill by voice-vote on the same day the CIA torture report summary from the Senate Intelligence Committee released. A voice-vote essentially means the bill was declared "passed" without the vote being recorded and not very many lawmakers needed to be present for its passage.

However, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) added an amendment to the bill that created a new Section 309, requiring it to go back to the House for approval.

Initially, Section 309 required "the heads of the DNI, CIA, DIA, NSA, NRO, and NGA to ensure that there is a full financial audit of their respective entities each year and that each audit contains an unqualified opinion of the entity's financial statements." It required "the chief financial officer of each entity to provide an annual audit report to Congress."

The new Section 309, according to Amash, "authorizes 'the acquisition, retention, and dissemination' of nonpublic communications, including those to and from U.S. persons. The section contemplates that those private communications of Americans, obtained without a court order, may be transferred to domestic law enforcement for criminal investigations."

"To be clear, Sec. 309 provides the first statutory authority for the acquisition, retention, and dissemination of U.S. persons’ private communications obtained without legal process such as a court order or a subpoena. The administration currently may conduct such surveillance under a claim of executive authority, such as E.O. 12333. However, Congress never has approved of using executive authority in that way to capture and use Americans’ private telephone records, electronic communications, or cloud data." - Rep. Justin Amash, letter to fellow members of Congress

On the same day Feinstein decried the actions of the CIA (infringing on the civil liberties of others by using torture) on the Senate floor, she stealthy added an amendment to an appropriations bill that gives the executive branch and law enforcement agencies virtually unlimited access to the private communications of persons (citizens or non-citizens) in the United States without approval from a judge.

The bill was then rushed to the House floor on Wednesday for a voice-vote without much debate. While Amash went before the House to demand a roll call vote, there was not enough time to stop the bill. It passed 325-100, with 9 lawmakers not voting. Forty-five Republicans and 55 Democrats voted "Nay."

IVP Existence Banner

Here is a list of the 100 lawmakers who voted "Nay." Was yours one of them?

Amash (R-Mich.)
Bass (D-Calif.)
Bentivolio (R-Mich.)
Blumenauer (D-Ore.)
Bonamici (D-Ore.)
Brat (R-Va.)
Bridenstine (R-Okla)
Brooks (R-Ala.)
Broun (R-Ga.)
Burgess (R-Texas)
Chu (D-Calif.)
Clark (D-Mass.)
Clarke (D-N.Y.)
Clawson (R-Fla.)
Cohen (D-Tenn.)
Conyers (D-Mich.)
Cummings (D-Md.)
DeFazio (D-Ore.)
DelBene (D-Wash.)
DesJarlais (R-Tenn.)
Doggett (D-Texas)
Doyle (D-Penn.)
Duncan (R-S.C.)
Duncan (R-Tenn.)
Eshoo (D-Calif.)
Farr (D-Calif.)
Garamendi (D-Calif.)
Garcia (D-Fla.)
Garrett (R-N.J.)
Gibson (R-N.Y.)
Gohmert (R-Texas)
Gosar (R-Ariz.)Gowdy (R-S.C.)
Graves (R-Ga.)
Grayson (D-Fla.)
Griffith (R-Va.)
Grijalva (D-Ariz.)
Gutiérrez (D-Ill.)
Hahn (D-Calif.)
Hanabusa (D-Hawaii)
Hastings (D-Fla)
Heck (D-Wash.)
Holt (D-N.J.)
Honda (D-Calif.)
Huelskamp (R-Kan.)
Huffman (D-Calif.)
Jackson Lee (D-Texas)
Jones (R-N.C.)
Jordan (R-Ohio)
Kaptur (D-Ohio)
Kildee (D-Mich)
Kingston (R-Ga.)
Labrador (R-Idaho)
Lee (D-Calif.)
Lewis (D-Ga.)
Lofgren (D-Calif.)
Lowenthal (D-Calif.)
Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Massie (R-Ky.)
Matsui (D-Calif.)
McClintock (R-Calif.)
McCollum (D-Minn.)
McDermott (D-Wash.)
McGovern (D-Mass.)
Meadows (R-N.C.)
Mica (R-Fla.)Moore (D-Wis.)
Mulvaney (R-S.C).
Nadler (D-N.Y.)
Nugent (R-Fla.)
O'Rourke (D-Texas)
Pallone (D-N.J.)
Perry  (R-Penn.)
Pocan (D-Wis.)
Poe (R-Texas)
Polis (D-Colo.)
Posey (R-Fla.)
Rangel (D-N.Y.)
Ribble (R-Wis.)
Roe (R-Tenn.)
Rohrabacher (R-Calif.)
Salmon (R-Ariz.)
Sanford (R-S.C.)
Schakowsky (D-Ill.)
Scott, Austin (R-Ga.)
Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.)
Serrano (D-N.Y.)
Speier (D-Calif.)
Stockman (R-Texas)
Swalwell (D-Calif.)
Takano (D-Calif.)
Tierney (D-Mass.)
Tipton (R-Colo.)
Velázquez (D-N.Y.)
Waters (D-Calif.)
Weber (R-Texas)
Welch (D-Vt.)
Woodall (R-Ga.)
Yarmuth (D-Ky.)
Yoho (R-Fla.)

Note: It is not fully clear how many of these lawmakers voted against the bill because of the new Section 309.

Latest articles

votes
Wyoming Purges Nearly 30% of Its Voters from Registration Rolls
It is not uncommon for a state to clean out its voter rolls every couple of years -- especially to r...
27 March, 2024
-
1 min read
ballot box
The Next Big Win in Better Election Reform Could Come Where Voters Least Expect
Idaho isn't a state that gets much attention when people talk about politics in the US. However, this could change in 2024 if Idahoans for Open Primaries and their allies are successful with their proposed initiative....
21 March, 2024
-
3 min read
Courts
Why Do We Accept Partisanship in Judicial Elections?
The AP headline reads, "Ohio primary: Open seat on state supreme court could flip partisan control." This immediately should raise a red flag for voters, and not because of who may benefit but over a question too often ignored....
19 March, 2024
-
9 min read
Nick Troiano
Virtual Discussion: The Primary Solution with Unite America's Nick Troiano
In the latest virtual discussion from Open Primaries, the group's president, John Opdycke, sat down ...
19 March, 2024
-
1 min read
Sinema
Sinema's Exit Could Be Bad News for Democrats -- Here's Why
To many, the 2024 presidential primary has been like the movie Titanic - overly long and ending in a disaster we all saw coming from the start. After months of campaigning and five televised primary debates, Americans are now faced with a rematch between two candidates polling shows a majority of them didn’t want....
19 March, 2024
-
7 min read