[国会记录第162卷，第95号（2016年6月15日星期三）] [House] [页面H3892-H3904]国防拨款法案，2017年扬声器专业队的舞台。Pursuant to House Resolution 783 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, H.R. 5293. [...] Amendment No. 31 Offered by Mr. Massie The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 31 printed in House Report 114-623. Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the following new section: Sec. __. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), none of the funds made available by this Act may be used by an officer or employee of the United States to query a collection of foreign intelligence information acquired under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1881a) using a United States person identifier. (b) Subsection (a) shall not apply to queries for foreign intelligence information authorized under section 105, 304, 703, 704, or 705 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1805; 1842; 1881b; 1881c; 1881d), or title 18, United States Code, regardless of under what Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act authority it was collected. (c) Except as provided for in subsection (d), none of the funds made available by this Act may be used by the National Security Agency or the Central Intelligence Agency to mandate or request that a person (as defined in section 101(m) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801(m))) alter its product or service to permit the electronic surveillance (as defined in section 101(f) of such Act (50 U.S.C. 1801(f))) of any user of such product or service for such agencies. (d) Subsection (c) shall not apply with respect to mandates or requests authorized under the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (47 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.). The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 783, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Massie) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes. [[Page H3894]] The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky. Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, our Founding Fathers included the Fourth Amendment in our Constitution for a reason: to require probable cause and a warrant before the government and government agents can spy on any of its citizens. Our Founding Fathers were fed up, and, frankly, I think our citizens are fed up with being spied on by the government. I am here to offer an amendment today that would prevent warrantless surveillance of Americans. I am offering it with many of my colleagues. I want to mention that this amendment has passed this House, this body, twice previously: once by 293-123, and another time by 255-174. It enjoys broad bipartisan support. My cosponsors are Mr. Jordan, Mr. O'Rourke, Mr. Amash, Representative Pocan, Representatives Nadler, Gabbard, Farenthold, Ted Lieu of California, Issa, Butterfield, Labrador, Gosar, DelBene, Poe of Texas, Conyers, Sensenbrenner, and Ms. Zoe Lofgren from California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren). Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, warrantless bulk collection of U.S. person communications and information was not ended with the USA FREEDOM Act. Twice in the last 2 years the House voted overwhelmingly to close two loopholes, but House leadership blocked us. The first back door will be shut by prohibiting search of government databases for information pertaining to U.S. citizens without a warrant. You can get the information, but you have to get a warrant. In October of 2011, in a declassified FISA court decision, we learned that tens of thousands of wholly domestic communications--which are not even allowed to be collected under 702--have been collected. We need to make sure that, when you look for an American in that database, you get a warrant as the Fourth Amendment requires. The second door to be shut prohibits the government from coercing companies into weakening security protections by creating back doors in products to make surveillance easier. What is encryption? It is sophisticated computer code that is the most powerful tool we have for preventing outsiders from gaining entry into digital systems. Encryption protects the power grid, the air traffic control system, and your smartphone. Even if a weakness in encryption is promoted and created with good intentions, it is only a matter of time until a hacker finds and exploits it. Such flaws put data security of every person and business--and really, the security of the United States--at risk. Our government should strengthen the technology that protects our privacy, our businesses, and our country--not take advantage of it. The Massie-Lofgren amendment will make America safer, and it will defend the Fourth Amendment. Mr. Chairman, I urge its adoption. Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from California. May I inquire as to how much time I have remaining? The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky has 2 minutes remaining. Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5 minutes. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would impose greater restrictions on the intelligence community's ability to protect our national security and create an impediment to the government's ability to locate threat information already in its possession. Such an impediment, therefore, would put a lot more American lives at risk both at home and abroad. Colleagues, as recent events have tragically reminded us, this issue is critical to our national security. Lawful queries can enable analysts to identify potential terror plots, to identify foreign nations trying to hack into our networks, to locate foreign intelligence officers spying within our borders, and, yes, to locate hostage victims. These authorities were fully considered, as they should be, and we will hear in a moment from Chairman Goodlatte during the development and the consideration of the USA FREEDOM Act. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), my ranking member. Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the time and simply associate myself with the chairman's remarks. I am opposed to the amendment. I do appreciate the seriousness of people's opinion on both sides of this issue. I am an appropriator. I don't have a complete allergic reaction to authorizing in an appropriation bill, but given the seriousness of this issue and the complexity of it, I don't think this is the right venue to make that decision. It should be done in the authorizing process. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to reiterate that all this amendment basically does is reassert the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. All of the tools currently available to our intelligence agencies and those that keep us safe in the United States would still be available. The only thing that changes after this amendment passes is that the warrant is required to search for information on Americans. It has been this way constitutionally since the beginning of our country. We are just trying to reassert that. Let them have all the tools they have today; just require a warrant if you want to search for information on Americans. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Stewart), a member of the Intelligence Committee. Mr. STEWART. Mr. Chair, I rise today to oppose the Massie amendment and the inaccurate accusations that underlie it. Let me restate that. The supposition of this amendment is based off a fundamental misunderstanding of intelligence operations. Contrary to rumor, it is illegal to use 702 surveillance authorities to spy on Americans. It is subject to multiple layers of oversight, and section 702 is an extremely powerful tool that has proven effective in disrupting terror plots, including, for one example, the 2009 plot to bomb the New York City subway. If this amendment were in effect today, the intelligence community would be unable to query the 702 database for the names of the Orlando nightclub attacker, for his wife, or even the nightclub itself. We should be focusing on thwarting terror attacks, not on thwarting the ability of intelligence professionals to investigate and to stop them. Mr. Chairman, I urge Members to prioritize the safety of U.S. citizens and to reject false allegations. Let me say that one more time: false and irresponsible allegations of government spying on Americans. We can scarcely afford to hamstring our intelligence community as it investigates these horrific shootings and tries to prevent similar plots from reaching fruition. All of us want to protect our privacy and our constitutional rights. I want to protect our privacy and our constitutional rights. But objections to intelligence operations must be based on facts and not rumors or misunderstandings. Limiting access to critical law enforcement tools to stop these plots would directly put Americans in danger. Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining? The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky has 1\1/4\ minutes remaining. Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record a letter from the Director of National Intelligence that shows that Americans are being spied on without a warrant using the 702 program. Director of National Intelligence, Washington, DC, March 28, 2014. Hon. Ron Wyden, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Senator Wyden: During the January 29, 2014, Worldwide Threat hearing, you cited declassified court documents from 2011 indicating that NSA sought and obtained the authority to query information collected under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act (FISA), using U.S. person [[Page H3895]] identifiers, and asked whether any such queries had been conducted for the communications of specific Americans. As reflected in the August 2013 Semiannual Assessment of Compliance with Procedures and Guidelines Issued Pursuant to Section 702, which we declassified and released on August 21, 2013, there have been queries, using U.S. person identifiers, of communications lawfully acquired to obtain foreign intelligence by targeting non U.S. persons reasonably believed to be located outside the U.S. pursuant to Section 702 of FISA. These queries were performed pursuant to minimization procedures approved by the FISA Court as consistent with the statute and the Fourth Amendment. As you know, when Congress reauthorized Section 702, the proposal to restrict such queries was specifically raised and ultimately not adopted. For further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact Deirdre M. Walsh in the Office of Legislative Affairs. Sincerely, James R. Clapper. Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, who has the right the close? The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey has the right to close. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe). Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, our government spies on Americans. Section 702 was designed to go after the bad guys overseas, but it is being used to collect communications of Americans in America without a search warrant under the Fourth Amendment. The amendment that the gentleman from Kentucky has introduced does something very basic. It says the Fourth Amendment will apply to a 702(a). If you have got a search warrant, go see a judge like I used to be; and if you have probable cause, then let a judge sign it. If you don't have probable cause, then you don't get a warrant. That is all it does. It says the Constitution must apply to Americans, and fear tactics--I am sorry--on the other side don't change the facts. Get a warrant if you have probable cause. That is all the gentleman from Kentucky's amendment does. Mr. MASSIE. To the judge's point, I would say that this doesn't take any tools away from those who want to investigate what happened in Orlando, none whatsoever. That is a mischaracterization, a complete mischaracterization of this amendment. You obviously can get a warrant on the perpetrator of this crime. So it would be wrong to characterize it in the way it is being characterized. It is unfortunate that my colleagues would take advantage of that situation to try and motivate people to vote ``no'' against this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment. It doesn't take away any of the tools. Read the amendment; you will find out. Just get the warrant; do the search. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, before I yield my time, how much time remains on my side? The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey has 2 minutes remaining. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the subcommittee. Mr. Chairman, the tragic mass shooting in Florida Sunday morning is but the latest in a string of terror attacks here in America. Sadly, these plots have not been carried out by foreign terrorists but by Americans against Americans, on American soil. We are all searching for the same answer: What motivated Omar Mateen to kill? Investigators are still combing through evidence to determine whether Mateen was in contact with known or suspected terrorists. This amendment prohibits the government from searching data already in its possession, collected lawfully under section 702 of FISA, to determine whether Omar Mateen was in contact with foreign terrorists overseas. Despite the characterization by proponents of the amendment that a search could occur if the government has obtained a FISA or criminal probable cause-based order, the exception does not, in fact, authorize such a query. Section 702 and the other provisions of the FISA Amendments Act are not set to expire until December 31 of next year. The House Judiciary Committee shares the concerns of all here that we protect all Americans' rights under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The committee has engaged and will continue to be engaged in robust oversight of the programs operated under the act. A floor amendment to a spending bill debated for 10 minutes is not the appropriate venue for Congress to alter our intelligence gathering capabilities. This complicated issue must be closely examined and appropriately vetted by the committees of jurisdiction. Sunday's deadly attack proves once again that the terror threat has not dissipated. The FBI has roughly 1,000 active ISIS probes in the United States, and these are probes into those we know about. Now is not the time to block the use of a critical investigative tool. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Massie). The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it. Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote. The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kentucky will be postponed. [...]