[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 75 (Friday, May 15, 2015)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E726-E727]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  UNITING AND STRENGTHENING AMERICA BY FULFILLING RIGHTS AND ENSURING 
            EFFECTIVE DISCIPLINE OVER MONITORING ACT OF 2015

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN

                              of maryland

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, May 13, 2015

  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 2048, 
the USA Freedom Act.
  In the wake of last week's 2nd Circuit Court Decision, I want to 
commend Chairman Goodlatte, Ranking Member Conyers, Congressman 
Sensenbrenner, and Congressman Nadler, for crafting legislation that 
makes meaningful reforms to many NSA surveillance programs--including 
Section 215 of the Patriot Act--and is a departure from the untenable 
status quo. However, despite these positive reforms, this bill fails to 
address Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, an even more invasive 
program than Section 215 which allows the government to collect both 
data and content of Americans without a warrant.
  Last year's version of the USA Freedom Act similarly scaled back many 
of the surveillance programs the NSA currently has at its disposal. 
Unfortunately, Section 702 was not one of them. Throughout the process, 
we were repeatedly assured by Chairman Goodlatte and Congressman 
Sensenbrenner that there would be a real future effort to address 
Section 702. At that time, Rep. Sensenbrenner stated, ``Section 702 of 
FISA has been improperly used to obtain the content of Americans' 
private communications without a warrant, which is unconstitutional 
under the Fourth Amendment and a blatant violation of Americans' civil 
liberties.''
  Like Rep. Sensenbrenner, I have also consistently said that Section 
702 opened the door to some of the most troublesome surveillance 
practices that have come to light in recent years. Last year, I 
strongly supported the effort to fix those aspects of Section 702. 
Unfortunately, as I indicated last year, last minute changes stripped 
out provisions that would have ``prevented the NSA from being able to 
search government databases for foreign communications content of 
American citizens without a warrant.'' When those important provisions 
were removed, Chairman Goodlatte and Rep. Sensenbrenner pledged that we 
would address these reforms without delay.
  Unfortunately, here we are a year later and Chairman Goodlatte and 
Rep. Sensenbrenner still have not allowed for a full debate and vote on 
this issue. Despite the Chairman's supposed support to end Section 702, 
when Congresswoman Lofgren offered an amendment during markup of the 
USA Freedom Act to prohibit these warrantless backdoor searches, 
Chairman Goodlatte said, ``this is

[[Page E727]]

a poison pill amendment . . ., there is a time and a place for 
everything.'' When this bill came before the Rules Committee, Rep. 
Lofgren was not even allowed to offer her amendment.
  The refusal to include reforms to Section 702 is even more 
disappointing given that there are many important provisions in this 
bill that provide additional safeguards to protect the privacy and 
civil liberties of Americans. Specifically, this bill puts significant 
constraints on the government's ability to collect data under Section 
215. No longer will the NSA be able to collect the phone records of 
millions of Americans who have no connection to crime or terrorism. 
Instead, every request made by the NSA for specific call records must 
be reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the FISA court.
  This legislation also carefully constructs the definition of the 
``specific selection terms'' the government can use to access call 
records. H.R. 2048 requires the ``specific selection term'' to be an 
``individual, account, or personal device.'' As a result, no longer 
will the NSA be able to collect phone records in bulk using terms like 
``People in Maryland'' and ``Area Code 301.''
  Despite these improvements to Section 215, I remain disappointed that 
the bill does not establish a Citizens Advocate to represent citizens' 
privacy interests at the secret FISA Court proceedings. In 2013, 
Representative Jim Jordan and I introduced bipartisan legislation to 
create such a position. The initial draft of last year's USA Freedom 
Act included this provision, but this language has since been weakened 
and only provides for a panel of advisors to be employed at the 
discretion of the FISC.
  Last month's decision by the Second Circuit in ACLU v. Clapper, makes 
clear that Section 215 is illegal and that a clean re-authorization 
would be a clear violation of the law. So while I appreciate the 
reforms made in this bill to Section 215, these reforms are modest 
given the Court's recent decision. On the other hand, Section 702 of 
the FISA Amendments Act does not sunset until the end of 2017 and there 
is no clear indication that we will be voting to curtail this program 
anytime in the near future. I believe that today's legislation could be 
our last real opportunity to address this. It is my hope that the 
companion legislation in the Senate includes these provisions and that 
I will be able to support a final compromise bill later this year.

                          ____________________