Public Policy Implications of the President ’ s Review Group

1. Public Policy Implications of the President’s Review Group Peter Swire Huang Professor of Law and Ethics Scheller College of Business Georgia Institute of Technology April 16, 2014

2. Thank you for the invitation • Delighted to be here today • My first year at GT has been unexpectedly busy with the Review Group • I look forward to getting to know Public Policy much better

3. Overview of the Talk • Intro to Review Group • The central puzzle: how should we govern secret agencies in an open democracy? • History of secrecy and transparency (Watergate) • RG recommendations on transparency and oversight • We are in a time where policy change is possible

4. Creation of the Review Group • Snowden leaks of 215 and Prism in June, 2013 • August – Review Group named • Report due in December • 5 members

5. December 2013: The Situation Room

6. Our assigned task • Protect national security • Advance our foreign policy, including economic effects • Protect privacy and civil liberties • Maintain the public trust • Reduce the risk of unauthorized disclosure

7. Our Report • Meetings, briefings, public comments • 300+ pages in December • 46 recommendations • Section 215 database “not essential” to stopping any attack; recommend government not hold phone records • Pres. Obama speech January • Adopt 70% in letter or spirit • Additional recommendations under study • Organizational changes to NSA not adopted

8. An Ethical and Legal Challenge • How govern secret intelligence agencies in a democracy? • Thomas Jefferson: “An informed citizenry is the only true repository of the public will.” • Since WWII, enormous growth in IC • Cold War • War on Terrorism • Special concern if the secret surveillance is directed at the citizens themselves • That could threaten democracy

9. The Watergate Era and Secret Governance • 1960’s + 1970’s: “The Crimes of the U.S. Intelligence Agencies” • “Enemies list” in IRS • Dirty tricks in political campaigns • CIA, NSA, DoD surveillance in U.S. • “National security” domestic wiretaps by J. Edgar Hoover, without judicial review • The Watergate break-in itself was to spy on domestic political opposition, the DNC

10. Post-Watergate Solutions • Freedom of Information Act expanded • Privacy Act: goal of no secret govt. databases • Government in the Sunshine Act • Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act 1978 • Domestic wiretaps for “foreign intelligence” but not vague “national security” grounds • Article III judges review each wiretap • Public report on number of wiretap orders • Congressional Intelligence committee oversight • Overall, shift toward transparency & oversight

11. Secrecy after 9/11 • Surveillance of hard-to-find new targets, the terrorists  secret surveillance • Sense of urgency & the Patriot Act • Wars in Iraq & Afghanistan • Warrant-less wiretaps (leaked 2005) • Large database of phone records (leaked 2006) • Snowden leaks beginning in June 2013 • Section 215 domestic telephone meta-data • Section 702 surveillance at targets overseas • The long list of other stories

12. Section 215 of the Patriot Act • June 2013: surprising that most/all domestic phone records were being collected under “foreign intelligence” authorities • Unclear what other domestic surveillance was occurring • Legislative proposals were pending for greater “information sharing” from private sector to government for “cybersecurity” purposes • Sharing would be permitted “notwithstanding any other (privacy) law”

13. Was this hotel room number a coincidence?

14. RG Findings • RG received thorough briefings • Finding: Section 215 had not been essential to preventing any attack • Good news: compliance has improved in NSA since 2008 • Good news: no evidence of meddling with domestic politics

15. RG Rec 11: Transparency “We recommend that the decision to keep secret from the American people programs of the magnitude of the section 215 bulk telephony meta-data program should be made only after careful deliberation at high levels of government and only with due consideration of and respect for the strong presumption of transparency that is central to democratic governance. A program of this magnitude should be kept secret from the American people only if (a) the program serves a compelling governmental interest and (b) the efficacy of the program would be substantially impaired if our enemies were to know of its existence.”

16. RG Recommendations on 215 • RG Rec 1 & 5: End current program of government holding the records • A “black box” that is hard to monitor from outside • Prevent mission creep/slippery slope to many bulk databases about domestic activities • Records already held by telcos for 18 months • Go to telcos when have individualized basis for request, with judicial review • President Obama this month proposed legislation, with all of these provisions

17. Other RG Transparency Recommendations • RG Rec 2: Similar judicial role for National Security Letters, by FBI • Shift toward disclosure far earlier than 50 years • Criminal searches often revealed in 6 months • RG Rec 4 & 7: bulk collection programs narrowly tailored, only with senior review, and public whenever possible • RG Rec 6: commission a meta-data study, to bring greater transparency and policy debate on data vs. meta-data

18. Transparency & the IT Industry • Big economic effects on public cloud computing market • Double in size 2012-2016 • Studies estimate US business losses from NSA revelations: tens of billions $/year • An opening for non-U.S. providers • Market has been dominated by US companies • Deutsche Telecomm and others: “Dont put your data in the hands of the NSA and US providers” • US industry response: more transparency • Boost consumer confidence that the amount of government orders is modest

19. Moving to More Transparency • RG Rec 9: OK to reveal number of orders, number they have complied with, information produced, and number for each legal authority (215, 702, NSL, etc.), unless compelling national security showing • RG Rec 10: more detailed government reporting of lawful access orders, by type of legal authority • RG Rec 31: US should advocate to ensure transparency for requests by other governments • Put more focus on actions of other governments • DOJ agreement with companies in January

20. Oversight goes with Transparency • Numerous RG recommendations to improve oversight • Public advocate in secret FISA court • New mechanisms for whistleblowers, to the Privacy & Civil Liberties Oversight Board • An Office of Technology Assessment in PCLOB to examine new IC technologies for privacy & civil liberties • Others • These build on existing FISC, Congress, Inspector General oversight mechanisms • Checks and balances against accumulation of power in the secret agencies

21. Oversight for the Full National Interest • Major theme of the report is that we face multiple risks, not just national security risks • Effects on allies, foreign affairs • Risks to privacy & civil liberties • Risks to economic growth & business • Historically, intelligence community is heavily walled off, to maintain secrecy • Now, convergence of civilian and military/intelligence communications devices, software & networks • Q: How respond to the multiple risks?

22. Addressing Multiple Risks • RG Recs 16 & 17: • New process & WH staff to review sensitive intelligence collection in advance • Senior policymakers from the economic agencies (NEC, Commerce, USTR) should participate • Monitoring to ensure compliance with policy • RG Rec 19: New process for surveillance of foreign leaders • Relations with allies, with economic and other implications, if this surveillance becomes public

23. Summary on These Recommendations • It is time to renew the transparency initiatives that resulted from Watergate • Fortunately, we don’t have political “enemies lists” this time • But, shouldn’t have powerful, well-budgeted watchers unless they are watched as well: • By the citizenry – transparency • By oversight and checks & balances

24. Conclusion • Are pessimists correct that nothing will change? • Section 215 program quite possibly will end • DOJ agreed to the transparency agreement • EU privacy regulation seemed dead, but Snowden-related sentiments resulted recently in EU Parliament 621-10 in favor • We are in a period where change is possible • It is a time where public policy activity is possible