Pro-privacy votes or sponsorships are green in the Voting Record. For each, a legislator gains one point. Anti-privacy votes or sponsorships, however, are red in the Voting Record. Each anti-privacy vote, moreover, lost a legislator one point. Using this system, members of the House scored between -3 and 4, and senators scored between -4 and 7.
Based on these scores, we assigned a grade between 0 and 5:
We scored the following bills, sponsorships and other actions:
Senate Bills and Amendments
(a) Votes on Pro-Privacy Bills and Amendments
H.R. 6172, the USA FREEDOM Reauthorization Act of 2020, would have reduced the federal government’s authority to seek an order requiring call detail records and would have made other pro-privacy reforms to federal intelligence gathering.
The Lee-Leahy Amendment to H.R. 6172 would have required the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to appoint a “friend of the court” to challenge the government’s factual assertions in surveillance applications and would have codified important accuracy procedures.
The Wyden-Daines Amendment to H.R. 6172 would have removed internet website browsing information and search history from the government’s scope of authority to access certain business records for foreign intelligence and international terrorism investigations.
The Paul Amendment to H.R. 6172 would have forbidden the use of information obtained under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, i.e., without a warrant, in criminal, civil, or administrative proceedings.
(b) Sponsorships of Pro-Privacy Bills
S. 3242, the Safeguarding Americans' Private Records Act of 2020, would have reformed and constrained the government’s authority to obtain a person’s GPS location, internet browsing, or business records under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act.
S. 3421, the USA FREEDOM Reauthorization Act of 2020, would have repealed the government’s authority to seek bulk call records and would have expanded the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s (FISC’s) authority to appoint a “friend of the court” to challenge the government’s factual assertions in surveillance applications.
S. 3420, the USA FREEDOM Extension and Amici Curiae Reform Act of 2020, would have expanded the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s (FISC’s) authority to appoint a “friend of the court” to challenge the government’s factual assertions in surveillance applications and allowed such “friends” to seek review of FISC decisions.
Additionally, sponsoring any or all of the three pro-privacy amendments to H.R. 6172, which we describe above, earned one point.
House Bills and Amendments
(a) Votes on Pro-Privacy Bills and Amendments
H.R. 6172, the USA Freedom Reauthorization Act of 2020, would have reduced the federal government’s authority to seek an order requiring call detail records and would have made other pro-privacy reforms to federal intelligence gathering.
The Amash/Lofgren Amendment to H.R. 2740, also called the Minibus Appropriations 2020, would have limited the collection of certain communications under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by forbidding the government from using any appropriations for such collection.
(b) Votes on Anti-Privacy Bills and Amendments
The Foster Amendment to H.R. 2740, also called the Minibus Appropriations 2020, would have repealed a statute that prohibits the Department of Health and Human Services from spending federal funds to create a national patient identifier.
(c) Sponsorships of Pro-Privacy Bills
H.R. 5675, the Safeguarding Americans' Private Records Act of 2020, would have reformed and constrained the government’s authority to obtain a person’s GPS location, internet browsing, or business records under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act.
H.R. 5396, the FISA Improvements Act of 2019, would have required the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to appoint a “friend of the court” to review the government’s surveillance applications whenever the application sought to target an identifiable U.S. person.
H.R. 7356, the Facial Recognition and Biometric Technology Moratorium Act of 2020, would have prohibited the government from using biometric surveillance without explicit statutory authorization and would have withheld funding from the states that engage in such surveillance.
H.R. 1942, the Ending Mass Collection of Americans’ Phone Records Act, would have forbidden the government from seeking an order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for ongoing production of tangible things.
Additionally, sponsoring H.R. 6172, which we describe above, earned one point.
Hearings
In addition to positive points given for pro-privacy votes and sponsorships, we awarded one point each to Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC), the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI), the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. These senators held hearings on the FBI’s abuse of the FISA process in the 2016 election—hearings that helped the American people better understand how why the government sometimes ignores and even violates their privacy rights.
Based on these scores, we assigned a grade between 0 and 5:
- Legislators scoring -2 or below earned a grade of 0.
- Legislators scoring -1 earned a grade of 1.
- Legislators scoring 0 earned a grade of 2.
- Legislators scoring 1 earned a grade of 3.
- Legislators scoring 2 or 3 earned a grade of 4.
- Legislators scoring 4 or above earned a grade of 5.
We scored the following bills, sponsorships and other actions:
Senate Bills and Amendments
(a) Votes on Pro-Privacy Bills and Amendments
H.R. 6172, the USA FREEDOM Reauthorization Act of 2020, would have reduced the federal government’s authority to seek an order requiring call detail records and would have made other pro-privacy reforms to federal intelligence gathering.
The Lee-Leahy Amendment to H.R. 6172 would have required the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to appoint a “friend of the court” to challenge the government’s factual assertions in surveillance applications and would have codified important accuracy procedures.
The Wyden-Daines Amendment to H.R. 6172 would have removed internet website browsing information and search history from the government’s scope of authority to access certain business records for foreign intelligence and international terrorism investigations.
The Paul Amendment to H.R. 6172 would have forbidden the use of information obtained under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, i.e., without a warrant, in criminal, civil, or administrative proceedings.
(b) Sponsorships of Pro-Privacy Bills
S. 3242, the Safeguarding Americans' Private Records Act of 2020, would have reformed and constrained the government’s authority to obtain a person’s GPS location, internet browsing, or business records under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act.
S. 3421, the USA FREEDOM Reauthorization Act of 2020, would have repealed the government’s authority to seek bulk call records and would have expanded the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s (FISC’s) authority to appoint a “friend of the court” to challenge the government’s factual assertions in surveillance applications.
S. 3420, the USA FREEDOM Extension and Amici Curiae Reform Act of 2020, would have expanded the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s (FISC’s) authority to appoint a “friend of the court” to challenge the government’s factual assertions in surveillance applications and allowed such “friends” to seek review of FISC decisions.
Additionally, sponsoring any or all of the three pro-privacy amendments to H.R. 6172, which we describe above, earned one point.
House Bills and Amendments
(a) Votes on Pro-Privacy Bills and Amendments
H.R. 6172, the USA Freedom Reauthorization Act of 2020, would have reduced the federal government’s authority to seek an order requiring call detail records and would have made other pro-privacy reforms to federal intelligence gathering.
The Amash/Lofgren Amendment to H.R. 2740, also called the Minibus Appropriations 2020, would have limited the collection of certain communications under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by forbidding the government from using any appropriations for such collection.
(b) Votes on Anti-Privacy Bills and Amendments
The Foster Amendment to H.R. 2740, also called the Minibus Appropriations 2020, would have repealed a statute that prohibits the Department of Health and Human Services from spending federal funds to create a national patient identifier.
(c) Sponsorships of Pro-Privacy Bills
H.R. 5675, the Safeguarding Americans' Private Records Act of 2020, would have reformed and constrained the government’s authority to obtain a person’s GPS location, internet browsing, or business records under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act.
H.R. 5396, the FISA Improvements Act of 2019, would have required the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to appoint a “friend of the court” to review the government’s surveillance applications whenever the application sought to target an identifiable U.S. person.
H.R. 7356, the Facial Recognition and Biometric Technology Moratorium Act of 2020, would have prohibited the government from using biometric surveillance without explicit statutory authorization and would have withheld funding from the states that engage in such surveillance.
H.R. 1942, the Ending Mass Collection of Americans’ Phone Records Act, would have forbidden the government from seeking an order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for ongoing production of tangible things.
Additionally, sponsoring H.R. 6172, which we describe above, earned one point.
Hearings
In addition to positive points given for pro-privacy votes and sponsorships, we awarded one point each to Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC), the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI), the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. These senators held hearings on the FBI’s abuse of the FISA process in the 2016 election—hearings that helped the American people better understand how why the government sometimes ignores and even violates their privacy rights.