The section 501 of fisa. That is no record of the actual conversation of the content that is recorded or collected by the National Security agency. The nsa has not been acting outside of its authority. The Metadata Program is carefully designed with program layers of oversight by all three branches of government. This is precisely where our government ought to operate. With input from article one, and article two and article three of the United States constitution. It is our duty to discuss the legal balance. We shouldnt be misleading the American People into thinking the nsa has been acting illegally. There is no program in the United States government that is as carefully monitored and overseen as this program is. Thise extent that some in chamber wish to review or provide more protections, we should proceed through debated legislative process, so the full implications for security are clearly understood. I reserve the balance of my time. The gentleman reserves. For what purpose does the gentleman from indiana rise . To claim the opposing time. Does the gentleman rise in opposition . I rise to claim the time. Is the gentleman opposed . I am not opposed to the amendment. Does the gentleman from new york seek . I claim time in opposition. I had a feeling. [laughter] the gentleman from indiana is recognized to claim the time in opposition. As a work in progress, ill recommend the gentleman from new york for 1. 5 minutes. The gentleman is recognized for 1. 5 minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. This amendment has been described and offered as an alternative to the amash amendment that we will consider next. It is not. This amendment restates the existing ban on the intentional targeting of the United States presence in section 702. It has the Obama Administration ban on click in the conference of the communications of u. S. Persons under section 715. I agree with this prohibition. But it has nothing to do with the current misuse of section 215 to engage in the suspicious collection of telephone records. The dragnet section reveals call information, including phone numbers, called duration, but not the content. Therefore, this amendment would have no impact whatsoever on this misuse of section 215. Metadata reveals highly personal information, including when and how often calls the doctor, a journalist, or a local tea party affiliates. By tracing the pattern of calls, the government can take details from anyones associations and activities. Congress never authorized this type of unchecked surveillance of our citizens. Is this problem, the indiscriminate collection of metadata under section 215, that we need to fix right now. The amendment restores the required relationship between the collection of records, and persons being investigated. The amash amendment does not fix the problem with 215. The other amendment does. However you vote, it is imperative that we also vote in favor of the men because this amendment, doing no harm, has not solve the problems that congress has a truculent in with the respect of the misuse of 215 of the patriot act in a. The gentleman from kansas. The gentleman reserves. From indiana . Yieldould be happy to time to the gentleman from texas, who makes an inquiry as to how much time he would like to consume. Theuld be happy to give gentleman three minutes. The gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. I thank the gentleman from indiana from yielding. I think the german from and this for offering this amendment because it helps focus on what concerns most americans, and that clarifies what is and is not happening. Fortimes it is a challenge those on the Intelligence Committee to talk openly about the safeguards and some of these programs. This amendment helps make it clear and reassures americans about some of the things they may have read or heard that has occurred within nsa. This amendment is not an overreaction that increases the danger that americans face from terrorism around the world. This amendment says that the nsa cannot acquire information for the purpose of targeting americans, and it says clearly that the nsa may not monitor the content of the communication of the americans. I think the key point that members need to know is that there are multiple layers of safeguards to make sure these programs operate in the way that the fisa court has laid them out to operate. The Intelligence Committees do a considerable amount of oversight, get regular reports, even if somebody asked and only punches a two instead of a three on her keyboard get a report about that. Members of the Intelligence Committee can sit next to analysts and what they are doing. It is not just the Intelligence Committee it is the fisa court. They have oversight. The same sorts of reports they can change the guidelines that operates under. In addition to that, there are internal Inspector General monitoring of these. You get every branch of government involved in making sure that the safeguards in place. Those same safeguards will be in place to make sure that the provisions of the gentlemans amendment are followed as well. Some would do away with these programs. No amount safeguards are good for them. They never say what would replace them. They would just have them go away. I guess they would just assume that somehow or other that americans could be made safe. The truth is, we have been credibly successful and somewhat lucky since 9 11. As far as preventing further terrorist attacks on our homeland. Oft is because of the work the military, intelligence professionals, Law Enforcement among and as i say, a fair amount of luck. But these rogue ramps at nsa have made these programs at nsa have made a crucial contribution to that success over the last decade. It seems to me we would be fool hardy to toss them away as some would want to do. I think this amendment strikes the right approach. I also believe that the wall street journal makes a good point when it says the last thing congress should do is kill a program in a rush to honor the reckless claims of mr. Snowden and his apologist. The time is expired. Does the gentleman from indiana wish any time . Im sorry, it is back to mr. Pompeo. The gentleman from kansas is recognized. I would like to yield three minutes or as much time as he would like, the general one the gentleman is working as for three minutes. Thank you. First, i rise in support of the pompeo amendment. This amendment reaffirms in america, privacy and security must coexist together. This amendment states that in no uncertain terms, the government can not use section 702 of the foreign intelligence act to target americans for surveillance. This summit also reaffirms that the phone records collected through section 215 of the patriot act, it makes the intent of congress very clear. I believe the pompeo amendment makes a powerful statement that n. S. A. Cannot target americans or listen to their phone calls. However, i do understand the concerns of the American People and of congress when it comes to these programs. On the house Intelligence Committee, we are reviewing potential ways to change the fisa act that will provide the Intelligence Community with the tools it needs to keep our country safe while also protecting privacy and civil liberties. We are committed to having this important discussion. However, i do have concerns about the amendment we will debate next. That amendment is an onoff switch of section 215 of the patriot act and will have an impact and our country will be more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. A planned attack on the new york city subway system was stopped because of section 215. But the amash amendment passes this authority, and it will end it. This amendment goss too far too fast on the wrong lemmingstive vehicle. We need to debate the scope of this program and we are, but this is an extreme kneejerk reaction to the situation. This program has been authorized and reauthorized by congress and receives extensive oversight by the Intelligence Committee and it is a vital tool to protect our nation. Remember, 9 11 happened in part because we failed to connect the dots. One of the critical tools we now have and use to connect those dots is section 215 of the patriot act. Remember, this is just phone records, just phone numbers, no conversations. I respectfully urge a no vote on the amash amendment and yes vote on the pompeo amendment. I yield back. The chair the gentleman from indiana is recognized. Mr. Visclosky i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from california. The chair the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. Ms. Lofgren i urge a no vote on the amendment. Why . Because it restates current law and current law has been interpreted by the administration in a way that is frankly contrary to the intent of the crafters of the patriot act. Section 215 of the patriot act says that you can obtain information that is relevant to a National Security investigation. Now whats happened since congress enacted that provision . Its a low bar, but under the n. S. A. s interpretation, its no bar at all, because as has been widely reported, they are collecting the information about every phone call made by every american. Clearly, that is not relevant to a terrorist investigation. I think its important to note that Business Records that are the subject of 215 include a lot of sensitive information. What are Business Records . Phone records . Internet records . Credit card records . Medical records . Are these things that we would voluntary give up to the government . No. They are incredibly sensitive and thats why they are being sought. I do think it is important to note that the amendment that will follow after this one doesnt end the ability of the government to pursue terrorism. We are all for that. It merely requires that the government adhere to the law, which requires that there be relevant to a terrorist investigation. I do think i certainly do not challenge the motivation of the gentleman who has offered this amendment, but i do think that if you think this provides a remedy, then youre wrong. This provides a fig leaf. We should vote against it. And i hope we will move onto the amash amendment and solve the problem today. And i thank the gentleman, and i yield back. The chair the gentleladys time has expired. The gentleman from kansas. Mr. Pompeo i reserve. Mr. Visclosky i yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentleman from kansas is recognized. Mr. Pompeo i would like to correct a couple of things. It is not a fig leaf but things to clarify about what section 215 authorizes and section 702 authorizes. It is intended to make Crystal Clear the boundaries of these two important National Security programs. These laws have been in place and interpreted by multiple administrations in the same way. There has been no change in this law when this president came into office and we should continue to support these programs regardless who is the commander in chief of the United States. I would ask my colleagues to support this amendment. And i yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman has yielded his time. Therefore, all time on this debate has ceased. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from kansas. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. The motion is adopted. I ask for the yeas and nays. The chair does the gentleman request a recorded vote . It is now in order to consider amendment number 100 printed in house report 11170. 113170. For what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition . Mr. Amash i have an amendment at the desk. The clerk amendment number 100 printed in house report 113170 offered by mr. Amash of michigan. The chair pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from michigan, mr. Amash, and a member opposed will each control 7 1 2 minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. Mr. Amash i yield myself one minute. The chair the gentleman is recognized for one minute. Mr. Amash we are here today for a very simple reason, to defend the Fourth Amendment, to defend the privacy of each and every american. As director of National Intelligence has made clear, the government collects the phone records without suspicion of every single american in the United States. My amendment makes a simple but important change. It limits the governments collection of those records of the records to those records that pertain to a person who is the subject of an investigation pursuant to section 215. Opponents of this amendment will use the same tactics that every government throughout history has used to justify its violation of rights. Fear. Theyll tell you the government must violate the rights of the American People to protect us against those who hate our freedoms. They will tell you there is no expectation of privacy in documents that are stored with a third party. Tell that to the American People. Tell that to our constituents back home. We are here to answer one question for the people we represent. Do we oppose the suspicionless collection of every americans phone records . The chair the gentlemans time has expired. The gentleman reserves. Who seeks recognition . I reserve the balance. The gentleman from florida seeks recognition. The gentleman is recognized for 7. 5 minutes. Im very happy to yield three minutes to the gentleman, very distinguished chairman of the house Intelligence Committee, the gentleman from michigan. The gentleman from michigan is recognized. Thank you, madam chairman. I think the American People have legitimate concerns. They should be addressed. We should have time and education on what actually happens in the particular program of which we speak. I will give you my word that this fall, we will work to find additional privacy protections with this program that has no e mails, no phone calls, no names, and no addresses. 14 federal judges have said yes, this comports with the constitution. 800 cases around the 1979 case have affirmed the underpinnings of the legality of this case. 800. So 14 judges are wrong, 800 Different Cases are wrong. The legislators on both Intelligence Committees are all wrong. Why is it that people of both parties looked at this program, at a time when our nation is under siege, by those individuals who want to bring violence to the shores of the United States . Those who know it best to support the program because we spent as much time on this to get it right. To make sure the oversight is right. No other program, no other program has the legislature and the Judicial Branch doing oversight of a program like this. If we had this and other agencies, we would not have problems. Think about who we are in this body. Have 12 years gone by, and her memories faded so badly we have forgotten what happened on september 11 . This bill turns off a very specific program. It does not stop socalled spying and other things it has been alleged to do. That is not what is happening. It is not a surveillance bill. It is not monitoring. It does not do any of those things. What happened after september 11 that we didnt know september 10, passing this amendment takes us back to september 10. After it we said there is a seam, a gap. Somebody, terrorist overseas, living amongst us in the United States commonly missed it. We didnt have this capability. What if we had caught it . It is not a what if. It is not theoretical. 54 times, this and the other program stopped and thwarted terrorist attacks here and in europe. Saving real lives. This is real. It will have a real consequence. This is hard. Think of the people who came here before us in this great body. Madison, lincoln, kennedy served here. The issues they dealt with, and the politics of big, and moving america forward. The mandate of this house that we must provide for the general defense of the United States, and think of those challenges. Are we so small that we can only look at our facebook likes today . Are we going to stand up and find how many lives we can save . Lets get back to the big politics of the protecting america. Reject this amendment. Lets do this right. The gentleman from florida reserves. I reserve. The gentleman from michigan is recognized. I yield 50 seconds to the gentleman from michigan. He is recognized for one minute. I thank the gentleman from yielding to me. Ladies and gentlemen of the house, this amendment will not stop the proper use of the patriot act, and fisa authorities to conduct terrorism and intelligence investigation. I would never block that. All this is intending to do is to curtail the ongoing dragnet collection and storage of the personal records of innocent americans. It does not defund the nsa, and it will continue to allow them to conduct fullfledged surveillance, as long as it relates to an actual investigation. Our joining together on this bipartisan amendment demonstrates our joint commitment to ensuring that our fight against terrorism, and espionage follows the rules of law. But the clear intent of the statutes passed by this congress. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to adopt this. The gentleman from michigan is reserved. The gentleman from florida is recognized. Im very happy to yield 2. 5 minutes to the gentlelady from minnesota, ms. Bachmann. The gentlelady from minnesota is recognized. Thank you madam speaker. This is a very important issue that we are taking up today. The number one duty of the American Government is the safety of the American People of our constituents, and our own