Rank these 4 people in order – most conservative to most liberal. McCain and Hillary sharing a moment Rand Paul and Obama – not really sharing a moment

INTRODUCTION TO THE PACKET MATERIALS Monday, July 6 th  By Will Repko,  Michigan State University

About this lecture  It is okay to read through the packet while I talk.  Located at:  On the right hand side, there’s an link to “2015 Packet and Core Files”  Think about some specific questions as we are talking  Ask questions – I won’t bite  It is less about writing down every word from every slide… it’s about understanding the concept

The Political Spectrum

What are some characteristics ?..  Of being politically conservative ?....  Of being politically liberal ?...

Some details about the Political Spectrum:  The politics of surveillance policies don’t neatly cut along party lines.  Amongst Republicans, there is a distinction between TEA PARTY and the REST OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.  Example – two Senators from Kentucky.  Senator Mitch McConnell – example of a “hawk”  Senator Rand Paul – example of a conservative that’s anti surveillance.  Golden Rule:  Most Democrats and Tea Party = anti-surveillance  Most Republicans and some conservative Democrats = pro-surveillance

What is metadata ?...

Examples of meta-data:  Originating Phone number, address, etc  The terminating phone number, address, etc.  Time of call  Duration of call  …..This Information is collected in bulk (indiscriminately) as opposed to being collected based upon an individually-targeted warrant.

It may be easier to explain what Metadata is NOT:  It is NOT ABOUT CONTENT of your phone calls, s, etc.  It is NOT ONLY ABOUT PHONE DATA – can be collected on , text, skype, etc  It is not UNAUTHORIZED – some judge has to give a thumbs-up (warrant, probable cause)

The Difference between Meta- Data and Warranted Surveillance:  Meta-data collects surveillance “in bulk” or “indiscriminately” – examples might include:  The web activity of all persons in a zip code.  The phone activity of all persons in an area code. Warranted Surveillance requires probable cause and tends to search a single person or a narrower range of persons. Warranted surveillance can be used to search any person – but tends to collect less raw information (than meta-data). This is because meta-data gathers info on hundred – if not thousands of US person.

But what about “Hops” ?...

How hops work  A “seed #” is a phone number where probable cause has been obtained (a warrant).  Once a seed is identified – the agency is allowed to follow-up on all #’s within “two hops”  Here’s an example:

So who stores this meta-data ?..  It is always COLLECTED by the phone and internet companies  … but there’s a major debate about who STORES this meta-data:  NSA – National Security Agency (an intelligence agency)  Phone Companies (i.e. Verizon, Sprint, etc)

But, who really cares about the meta-data ?...  I mean, so what, if the Federal Government has my meta-data ?...  How meta-data can be used to gather a lot of information on an individual.

Let’s Talk about the PATRIOT ACT.  The strikes happen – it was basically before your time, but – trust me – it was a huge event in terms of shaping US policy.  On the heels of 9-11, the Congress passed an act called:  Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001  It’s also called the “USA PATRIOT ACT”… or just the “Patriot Act”  The Act enhanced investigatory tools to counter-terrorism  It specifically passed “Section 215 of the Patriot Act” (often referred to as “215”) – which is important to understanding the Affirmative.

…and then this guy comes along:

Snowden’s Revelations  What can you all tell me about Snowden ?...  He revealed many things – but the most central one (for the Aff in the packet) is the revelation of the 215 PHONE meta-data program.  This sets the stage for the Freedom Act

Important Info About the Freedom Act  The technical name is the “USA FREEDOM ACT” – which stands for  U niting and S trengthening A merica by F ulfilling R ights and E nding E avesdropping, D ragnet-collection and O nline M onitoring Act.“  Important dates:  2014 Original Freedom Act  May 13 th, 2015 – The US House of Representative passes New Freedom Act.  June 2 nd, 2015 – The US Senate passes the New Freedom Act

Differences between the Old Freedom Act and the New Freedom Act  General Consensus – from pro-privacy groups – that the New Freedom Act was a bit watered-down.  The Aff – in the packet – will argue that some of the provisions of the Old Freedom Act should pass.  Specific Changes that were stripped from the Old Act that the Aff will say should be added :  SST’s – “Specific Selector Terms”  “Super-minimization” procedures  Pen-Register and “Trap and Trace” devices.

Advantages to the Packet Aff  Privacy Advantage  Bigotry Advantage  Journalism Advantage  Global Internet Freedom Advantage  India advantage and the “CMS”  Data Overload  US Tech Sector – and the “Cloud Computing” Industr y

Important Laws that Authorize Surveillance:  We’ve talked a lot about the PATRIOT ACT – and, amongst other things, the PATRIOT ACT contains:  Section 215 – which allows phone records to be collected. And – until recently – was interpreted to allow “bulk” collection of phone records.  Section 214 – which is the Pen Register Section There is also Section 702 of the “F.A.A.” (FISA Amendments Act). This is home to the PRISM program And Executive Order (usually called “Twelve-Triple 3”)

Sets up some important Negative Solvency attacks:  The topic limits the Aff to dealing with “domestic” surveillance. But some “foreign” surveillance programs can be used on US persons.  Examples of Lawyering:  702 and “information about a foreign person or target”  Ending 215 = may be no good