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 6th By Will Repko,

Michigan State University

About this lecture

It is okay to read through the packet while I talk. Located at: http://spartandebateinstitute.wikispaces.com/

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, email address, etc

The terminating phone number, email 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, emails, etc.

It is NOT ONLY ABOUT PHONE DATA – can be collected on email, 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 9-11-2001 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 Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling Rights and

Ending Eavesdropping, Dragnet-collection and Online Monitoring Act.“

Important dates: 2014 Original Freedom Act May 13th, 2015 – The US House of Representative passes

New Freedom Act. June 2nd, 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” Industry

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 12333 (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