Opening Statement
Ranking Member Conyers Statement at Markup of H.R. 3361, the “USA FREEDOM Act”
Washington, DC,
May 7, 2014
Statement of Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. Wednesday, May 7, 2014 at 1:00 A.M. It is not an accident that the House Judiciary Committee is the committee of primary jurisdiction with respect to the legal architecture of government surveillance. We are, for the most part, lawyers. And we are prone to asking difficult questions of government officials who are not always accustomed to giving their answers in public. But we ask these difficult questions because we are the proper forum for a complex discussion about privacy and civil liberties. Moreover, to the maximum extent possible, this committee has always worked to hold that debate in public, where we and the officials we call before us can be held accountable to our constituents. We believe that it is possible to have an open, honest conversation about the tools our government uses to keep us safe. We believe that this conversation includes a serious look at whether those tools accord with our national values. We believe that public debate on core questions of privacy and free association not only builds confidence in our government, but lends credibility and resilience to a national security infrastructure that is built to last. And, for a number of reasons, I believe that H.R. 3361, the USA FREEDOM Act, is the proper outcome of just that sort of open debate. Above all else, the USA FREEDOM Act represents the consensus view that all domestic bulk collection must end. In the aftermath of the attacks of September 11, 2001, without notice to the courts or the Congress, our government seized for itself the authority to conduct broad surveillance on its own citizens, without warrant or individualized suspicion. Over the years since, these programs have gained an imprimatur of legality. Let me be clear: dragnet surveillance of United States citizens is not legal or necessary. In my view, it never has been. With the passage of the USA FREEDOM Act, this position will be made explicit. This view has gained the support of 149 cosponsors, evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans. More than 40 organizations, representing technology and civil liberties groups across the political spectrum, continue to call for the passage of H.R. 3361. The technology and telecommunications sectors also back this bill - largely because it enables companies to be more transparent to their consumers; but also because comprehensive surveillance reform is good for their bottom line. The USA FREEDOM Act takes all of these interests into account. Although the managers’ amendment we will consider today is a less-than-perfect compromise, it makes important substantive changes that will work to restore confidence in the intelligence community. My conclusion is that these reasonable reforms are appropriate and consistent with our commitment to ‘[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects.’ I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3361, and I yield back. |
