House Panels Race Against Each Other to Reform NSA Spying

In an apparent turf war, two House committees have scheduled markups a day apart later this week for competing bills that seek to curtail the government’s spy programs.

WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 25: Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) (R), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) speak about immigration during a news conference on Capitol Hill, April 25, 2013 in Washington, DC. The news conference was held to discuss immigration control issues that are before Congress. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
National Journal
Dustin Volz
Add to Briefcase
Dustin Volz
May 5, 2014, 12:50 p.m.

After months of in­ac­tion, Con­gress is sud­denly bar­rel­ing ahead with pro­posed re­forms to the gov­ern­ment’s sur­veil­lance pro­grams, as two House pan­els duel to get their pre­ferred bills out of com­mit­tee and onto the floor.

The House Ju­di­ciary Com­mit­tee an­nounced Monday that it would bring an amended ver­sion of its stalled anti-NSA bill up for a vote Wed­nes­day. Just hours later, the House In­tel­li­gence Com­mit­tee re­spon­ded, an­noun­cing it had slated a markup of its own anti-spy­ing bill for a closed ses­sion Thursday.

The Ju­di­ciary Com­mit­tee’s USA Free­dom Act would ef­fect­ively end the bulk col­lec­tion of tele­phone metadata. It’s sup­por­ted by pri­vacy and civil-liber­ties groups that see it as the best op­tion to be in­tro­duced in Con­gress thus far, though the amended com­prom­ise re­leased Monday is less sweep­ing than the ori­gin­al.

One tech lob­by­ist noted con­cern that a pro­vi­sion that would have al­lowed com­pan­ies to dis­close to cus­tom­ers more in­form­a­tion about gov­ern­ment data re­quests has been dropped. In ad­di­tion, an ex­tern­al spe­cial ad­voc­ate that would over­see the For­eign In­tel­li­gence Sur­veil­lance Court would no longer be se­lec­ted by the Pri­vacy and Civil Liber­ties Over­sight Board. In­stead, the court’s judges would des­ig­nate five “amicus curi­ae” who pos­sess ap­pro­pri­ate se­cur­ity clear­ances.

“The de­tails still need to be hammered out, but the [amended Free­dom Act] bill is cer­tainly bet­ter than the one that the House In­tel­li­gence Com­mit­tee will be con­sid­er­ing this week, which is a non-starter,” said Laura Murphy, dir­ect­or of the Amer­ic­an Civil Liber­ties Uni­on’s le­gis­lat­ive of­fice in Wash­ing­ton, in a state­ment.

The In­tel­li­gence pan­el’s FISA Trans­par­ency and Mod­ern­iz­a­tion Act would ush­er in some re­forms favored by the same groups but it does not go as far, as it would not­ably al­low the gov­ern­ment to make phone com­pan­ies turn over metadata re­cords even be­fore the For­eign In­tel­li­gence Sur­veil­lance Court is­sued an ap­prov­ing or­der. It is favored more by back­ers of a a strong na­tion­al se­cur­ity ap­par­at­us.

Amid the policy dif­fer­ences, the com­pet­ing bills un­der­score a be­hind-the-scenes jur­is­dic­tion­al feud pit­ting some of the NSA’s most vo­cal crit­ics on the Ju­di­ciary pan­el against some of its long­time de­fend­ers on the In­tel­li­gence Com­mit­tee.

That rup­ture first emerged after Pres­id­ent Obama in March spe­cified how he in­tends to re­form the NSA. Days later, In­tel­li­gence Com­mit­tee Chair­man Mike Ro­gers, a Michigan Re­pub­lic­an, and Dutch Rup­pers­ber­ger, the pan­el’s top Demo­crat, in­tro­duced their bill, which closely ad­heres to Obama’s pro­pos­al. That bill was quickly re­ferred to the In­tel­li­gence pan­el for con­sid­er­a­tion by the House par­lia­ment­ari­an.

But some Ju­di­ciary mem­bers and staffers cried foul, say­ing that mat­ters in­volving the leg­al au­thor­ity of the in­tel­li­gence com­munity should — and nor­mally do — fall un­der their primary jur­is­dic­tion. The move was seen as an in­ten­tion­al at­tempt to cut the largely anti-sur­veil­lance pan­el out of a de­bate over how to re­form the NSA’s pro­gram that col­lects bulk tele­phone data.

Rep. Jer­rold Nadler, a Demo­crat, is­sued a state­ment at the time say­ing that “the House Ju­di­ciary Com­mit­tee must be the primary com­mit­tee at the cen­ter of this re­form.”

An In­tel­li­gence pan­el aide said plans to move ahead with ithe FISA Trans­par­ency bill have been in the works for weeks and that the schedul­ing of the markup was not in dir­ect re­sponse to the Ju­di­ciary’s sched­ule.

Whatever the polit­ics, two bills aim­ing to curb the NSA’s con­tro­ver­sial sur­veil­lance tac­tics are sud­denly ad­van­cing through the House, al­most a year after Ed­ward Snowden’s ini­tial leaks began to sur­face. Pri­vacy ad­voc­ates see the Free­dom Act as a pre­ferred op­tion, but the FISA Trans­par­ency bill more closely aligns with what the pres­id­ent wants. The Free­dom Act cur­rently has 143 co­spon­sors; FISA Trans­par­ency has 11.

Sen. Patrick Leahy has sponsored a com­pan­ion ver­sion of the Free­dom Act in his cham­ber, but it has yet to gain much trac­tion there. No com­pan­ion bill to FISA Trans­par­ency cur­rently ex­ists in the Sen­ate.

What We're Following See More »
Chef Jose Andres Campaigns With Clinton
5 hours ago
White House Weighs in Against Non-Compete Contracts
6 hours ago

"The Obama administration on Tuesday called on U.S. states to ban agreements prohibiting many workers from moving to their employers’ rivals, saying it would lead to a more competitive labor market and faster wage growth. The administration said so-called non-compete agreements interfere with worker mobility and states should consider barring companies from requiring low-wage workers and other employees who are not privy to trade secrets or other special circumstances to sign them."

House Investigators Already Sharpening Their Spears for Clinton
7 hours ago

House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz plans to spend "years, come January, probing the record of a President Hillary Clinton." Chaffetz told the Washington Post: “It’s a target-rich environment. Even before we get to Day One, we’ve got two years’ worth of material already lined up. She has four years of history at the State Department, and it ain’t good.”

No Lobbying Clinton’s Transition Team
9 hours ago

Hillary Clinton's transition team has in place strict rules to limit the influence that lobbyists could have "in crafting the nominee’s policy agenda." The move makes it unlikely, at least for now, that Clinton would overturn Obama's executive order limiting the role that lobbyists play in government

Federal Government Employees Giving Money to Clinton
10 hours ago

Federal employees from 14 agencies have given nearly $2 million in campaign donations in the presidential race thus far, and 95 percent of the donations, totaling $1.9 million, have been to the Clinton campaign. Employees at the State Department, which Clinton lead for four years, has given 99 percent of its donations to the Democratic nominee.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.