releases: http://franken.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2612
Data license: MIT · Data source: dwillis/congress-press
This data as json
| url | title | date | year | month | party | chamber | state | member_name | bioguide_id | domain | scraper | source | date_source | text | has_text | collected_at | updated_at |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| http://franken.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2612 | At Hearing, Witnesses Underscore Need for Chairman Franken?s Transparency Surveillance Bill | 2013-11-13 | 2013 | 2013-11 | Democrat | House | MN | Al Franken | F000457 | franken.senate.gov | legacy | Today, U.S. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), Chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law, held a hearing on his bill to help citizens hold the government accountable by increasing transparency over government surveillance of Americans. At the hearing, Chairman Franken—along with Sen. Dean Heller (R-Nev.), a representative from Google, and a leading privacy expert—underscored the need for his legislation, which is considered the leading surveillance transparency bill in the Senate. You can download video from the hearing here and read Chairman Franken's opening statement as prepared for delivery here. Chairman Franken's hearing focused on the Surveillance Transparency Act of 2013, which he first introduced this past summer. At the end of last month, the bill was reintroduced with Sen. Heller. "This bill is urgently necessary. Americans understand that we need to give due weight to privacy, on the one hand, and national security, on the other," Chairman Franken said in his opening statement. "But Americans are also naturally suspicious of executive power. And when the government does things secretly, Americans tend to think that power is being abused. This is exactly the place where Congressional oversight is useful and necessary." Later, Chairman Franken continued: "My bill would permanently ensure that the American people have the information they need to reach an informed opinion about government surveillance. And it would protect American companies losing business from misconceptions about [their] role in these programs. I'm pleased to say that this bill is the leading transparency proposal in the Senate, supported by a strong coalition of tech companies and civil liberties groups." The legislation would expand and improve ongoing government reporting about programs under the PATRIOT Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that have recently been the subject of controversy. It would also allow companies to report on the number of government information requests they receive and the number of their users affected by those requests, which would help protect American companies against losing business as a result of misconceptions about their role in these surveillance programs. These provisions will provide Americans with the basic information they need to decide for themselves whether the government is giving due weight to both privacy and national security. The following witnesses testified before Chairman Franken's subcommittee: • The Honorable Senator Dean Heller of Nevada (you can read Sen. Heller's testimony here). • The Honorable Robert Litt, General Counsel, Office of the Director of National Intelligence (you can read Mr. Litt's testimony here). • Brad Wiegmann, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, National Security Division, Department of Justice (you can read Mr. Wiegmann's testimony here). • Richard Salgado, Director, Law Enforcement and Information Security Matters, Google, Inc. (you can read Mr. Salgado's testimony here). • Kevin Bankston, Director, Free Expression Project, Center for Democracy and Technology (you can read Mr. Bankston's testimony here). • Paul Rosenzweig, Principal, Red Branch Consulting; Professorial Lecturer in Law, George Washington University (you can read Mr. Rosenzweig's testimony here). The full text of Chairman Franken's opening remarks as prepared for delivery is below: This hearing will come to order. Welcome to the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law. The subject of this hearing is my bill, the Surveillance Transparency Act of 2013. I'm proud to say that two weeks ago I re-introduced this bill with the support of my friend and colleague, Senator Dean Heller of Nevada, who we'll be hearing from shortly. This bill is urgently necessary. Americans understand that we need to give due weight to privacy, on the one hand, and national security, on the other. But Americans are also naturally suspicious of executive power. And when the government does things secretly, Americans tend to think that power is being abused. This is exactly the place where congressional oversight is useful and necessary.For months now, there has been a steady stream of news stories about the NSA's surveillance programs. And yet right now, by law, Americans cannot get really the most basic information about what's going on with those programs. Consider this: it's been months since the PRISM program and the telephone call records program were revealed to the public. And yet to this day:• Americans don't know the actual number of people whose information has been collected under those programs.• They don't know how many of those people are American.• And they have no way of knowing how many of these Americans have had their information actually seen by government officials - as opposed to just being held in a database.The Administration has taken good steps in good faith to address this problem. But I'm afraid that these steps are too little, and they're not permanent. And so, Americans still have no way of knowing whether the government is striking the right balance between privacy and security - or whether their privacy is being violated. There needs to be more transparency.I've written a bipartisan bill to address this. It will require the NSA to disclose to the public how many people are having their data collected under each key foreign intelligence authority. It would make the NSA estimate how many of those people are American citizens or green card holders - and how many of those Americans have had their information actually looked at by government agents. My bill would also lift the gag orders on Internet and phone companies so that those companies can tell Americans general information about the number of orders they're getting under each key authority and the number of users whose information has been produced in response to those orders. Right now, as a result of those gags, many people think that American Internet companies are giving up far more information to the government than they likely are. The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation estimates that American cloud computing companies could lose $22 to $35 billion in the next 3 years because of concerns about their involvement with surveillance programs. The analytics firm Forrester puts potential losses much higher, at $180 billion. A few companies have litigated and secured permission to publish limited statistics about the requests that they get. But again, this is too little - and it's not permanent. My bill would permanently ensure that the American people have the information they need to reach an informed opinion about government surveillance. And it would protect American companies against losing business from misconceptions about their role in these programs. I'm pleased to say that this bill is the leading transparency proposal in the Senate, supported by a strong coalition of tech companies and civil liberties groups. The version as introduced gained the support of 12 Senators, including the Chairman of the full Judiciary Committee, Patrick Leahy. I anticipate that we'll soon be adding our original supporters onto the new bipartisan bill, hopefully with some additional support as well. The purpose of this hearing is to make the case for this bill and to improve it by getting the feedback of top experts in the Administration, privacy groups, and the private sector. I've specifically asked the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Justice to provide candid comments on this bill - especially any concerns they have. I've already added provisions to the bill to protect national security, but I want to know of any further concerns they have. I suspect that I'll agree with them in some cases and disagree with them on others. In those cases, I want to have an open exchange about those disagreements. That said, I want it to be clear at the outset that I have the utmost respect for the men and women of our Intelligence Community. I think they are patriots, and I think they save lives. I look forward to starting this conversation. With that I'll turn to our Ranking Member, Senator Flake. | 1 | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z |