Showing posts with label US Congress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label US Congress. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 7, 2017

Intelligence officials’ outrageous contempt of Congress; Washington Post, June 7, 2017

Jennifer Rubin, Washington Post; Intelligence officials’ outrageous contempt of Congress

"All of these witnesses, national security adviser H.R. McMaster and other White House officials act as if they work for the president, not the American people. This is unacceptable in a functional democracy and would, if perpetuated, do serious damage to our democratic system. They need to tell the truth, the whole truth. Transparency and honesty cannot be optional for members of the executive branch. We will see if Republicans in Congress exhibit the same level of outrage as do Democrats. If not, they will be revealing their own willingness to defend the president and refusal to wholeheartedly perform their duties as required by their oaths."

Tuesday, May 30, 2017

Saturday, May 27, 2017

The U.K. Pleads with Congress to Change an Outdated Privacy Law to Help Fight Terrorism; MIT Technology Review, May 26, 2017

Mike Orcutt, MIT Technology Review; 

The U.K. Pleads with Congress to Change an Outdated Privacy Law to Help Fight Terrorism


"[Paddy] McGuinness pleaded with Congress to make a “technical adjustment” to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), which among other things prohibits U.S. technology companies from disclosing stored communications to foreign governments. Instead, foreign law enforcement officials must request that data via the time-consuming Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty process, which can take months.

McGuinness said that since many criminals in the U.K. communicate using products and services made by U.S. companies, this “arbitrary” legal hurdle is causing crimes to go unsolved and criminals unpunished (see “Why Congress Can’t Seem to Fix This 30-Year-Old Law Governing Your Electronic Data”).

Monday, February 20, 2017

Information Access and the 800-Pound Gorilla; Inside Higher Ed, February 20, 2017

Bryn Geffert, Inside Higher Ed; 

Information Access and the 800-Pound Gorilla


"The first copyright statute, enacted in 1790, allowed authors to retain copyright in their work for 14 years. And they could, if they desired, renew that copyright for an additional 14 years. Congress believed that a maximum period of 28 years offered the “limited” protections authorized by the U.S. Constitution to “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.”

Under the original statute, the Library of Congress, my library and any library in the world could digitize and disseminate without charge Miller’s, Flexner’s and Furtwangler’s studies of Hamilton to the homeschooled fifth-grader, to my 15-year old son, to the high school student in rural Arkansas, to the college student at a state university and to the scholar in Niger.

We have now, today, the technology to achieve the vision endorsed by our new (and possibly best) librarian of Congress -- a vision ostensibly shared by her admiring senatorial colleagues who, though they agree on little else, appear to agree on this.

What we lack and what we need is an old law -- an old law to serve new technology.

But first we need our new chief librarian to point at the gorilla, yell for Congress’s attention and beg the legislators who confirmed her to act in accord with the ideals they articulated last spring."

Thursday, January 19, 2017

Elizabeth Warren: Trump’s nominees are putting us all at risk by ignoring ethics laws; Washington Post, 1/19/17

Elizabeth Warren, Washington Post; Elizabeth Warren: Trump’s nominees are putting us all at risk by ignoring ethics laws

"Congress must take these ethical requirements seriously. No Cabinet member should receive a hearing before his or her background checks, financial disclosures and ethics agreements are finished and senators have had time to review them. Nominees should be forthcoming and transparent. If those hearings have occurred, nominees who have not completed their ethics reviews should return for another round of questions after that information is made available. Senators should be thorough in their assessment and questioning of nominees. And financial conflicts with official duties must be eliminated.

I recently introduced legislation that would protect the president and vice president from financial conflicts and constitutional violations by requiring them to fully disclose and divest themselves of all personal financial interests. No such law is necessary for Cabinet officials because the laws on the books are perfectly clear.
If Congress ignores these basic ethics requirements today, the American people and the nominees themselves likely will pay the price tomorrow."

Saturday, January 14, 2017

Republicans say they’ll protect you if you have a pre-existing condition. Don’t believe it.; Washington Post, 1/13/17

Paul Waldman, Washington Post; Republicans say they’ll protect you if you have a pre-existing condition. Don’t believe it.

"Here’s a list of some things that will return once they repeal the ACA:
  • The application process for insurance will become much more cumbersome and onerous.
  • Insurers will be able to charge people with pre-existing conditions higher premiums.
  • Insurers will be able to impose yearly and lifetime limits on benefits, which affects people who have serious illnesses or accidents. This could apply to those with good employer-provided coverage as well as those who buy on the individual market.
  • “Job lock,” in which people are afraid to leave their job and do something like start a new business for fear of losing the insurance they have, will return.
  • Insurers will be able to charge women higher premiums than men, because they consider being a woman to be a pre-existing condition.
  • Insurers will be able to rescind coverage when you get sick.
All of that was eliminated by the ACA. It’s possible that in their replacement plan Republicans might take steps to retain some of what the ACA did in these areas, but right now we just don’t know.
So let’s look at what we do know."

Sunday, December 18, 2016

Open Government Data Act set for progress in 2017 after Senate passage; FedScoop, 12/12/16

Samantha Ehlinger, FedScoop; Open Government Data Act set for progress in 2017 after Senate passage:
"A bill codifying and building on the president's executive order and the White House’s Open Data Policy passed the Senate unanimously early on Saturday morning, in a surprising last-minute effort to get the bill through the chamber before the holidays.
The OPEN Government Data Act, which sets in place a presumption that government data should be published in an open, machine-readable format, will likely not make it to President Barack Obama’s desk. But the bill could be reintroduced next year.
“Because transparency keeps Washington accountable to the people, government data should be made public unless an administration makes a compelling reason not to,” said Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., who introduced the legislation with Sen. Brian Schatz D-Hawaii, in a statement. “After passing the Senate with bipartisan support, we have momentum to carry this important work into the new year.”"

Monday, November 28, 2016

Congress May Hold Key to Handling Trump’s Conflicts of Interest; New York Times, 11/28/16

Peter J. Henning, New York Times; Congress May Hold Key to Handling Trump’s Conflicts of Interest:
"The key to dealing with conflicts — whether actual or potential — is transparency about any decision that could have an effect on Mr. Trump’s business interests if he decides not to divest his holdings or create a truly blind trust. Unlike the approach of many teenagers, who believe that it is easier to beg forgiveness than permission, in business the advance notice of a potential issue can lessen its impact.
The challenge is coming up with a mechanism for dealing with questions that might arise from Mr. Trump’s business interests rather than relying on the good faith of the parties involved or deflecting the issue with claims that any criticism is only political, especially in foreign countries in which the president-elect has investments, as The New York Times points out...
Some critics have pointed to potential problems Mr. Trump’s business interests could present under the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution. That obscure provision provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince or foreign state.”"

Wednesday, November 2, 2016

In Washington’s Drug Price Fight, Plenty of Blame to Go Around; Bloomberg, 10/27/16

Anna Edney, Robert Langreth, Bloomberg; In Washington’s Drug Price Fight, Plenty of Blame to Go Around:
"AARP, which represents seniors, is part of the Campaign for Sustainable Rx Pricing, along with Anthem Inc., one of the U.S.’s biggest health insurers, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association. The coalition has proposed having drugmakers submit for government review any price increases over 10 percent, and making it easier for generics to come to market.
Health insurers, who just six years ago were painted as villains during the passage of Obamacare, are relishing the turnabout now that drugmakers are the focus.
“These increases have got to stop,” said John Bennett, chief executive officer of Capital District Physicians’ Health Plan Inc., or CDPHP, a not-for-profit health insurer in Albany, New York. Last year, 22 percent of the premiums Capital took in for its commercial plans was spent on drugs.
“They are unsustainable for us as a society and they are morally wrong,” Bennett said in a telephone interview. “They are extracting profit out of a scarce resource that people need to survive.”

Sunday, October 9, 2016

Surveillance in the Post-Obama Era; New York Times, 10/8/16

Editorial Board, New York Times; Surveillance in the Post-Obama Era:
"One big issue is what to do when a key provision of the law that gives the N.S.A. the authority to collect the electronic communications of foreigners — which inevitably sucks in their correspondence with Americans — expires at the end of 2017. Before reauthorizing that part of the law, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the next president and Congress should craft a more narrow authority that ensures that the data of Americans cannot be searched without a warrant.
How best to respond to encryption technology, which is evolving rapidly, will be another major challenge...
The next president needs to take the initiative early on to outline a responsible philosophy and approach toward surveillance and privacy issues. Even if that happens, Congress still needs to be more assertive than in the past in setting clear parameters to ensure that intelligence gathering programs are legally sound and effective. It would be a shame if it took a new whistle-blower to force what should be a continuing, vigorous debate."

Thursday, September 29, 2016

Lawmakers to Wells Fargo CEO: ‘Why shouldn’t you be in jail?’; Washington Post, 9/29/16

Renae Merle, Washington Post; Lawmakers to Wells Fargo CEO: ‘Why shouldn’t you be in jail?’ :
"Some members peppered Stumpf with questions about whether he should be criminally prosecuted.
“Why shouldn’t you be in jail?” asked Rep. Michael E. Capuano (D-Mass.) “When prosecutors get hold of you, you are going to have a lot of fun.” “Do you think what you did was criminal?” Rep. David Scott (D-Ga.) asked. Stumpf responded that he had led the bank with “courage,” but was interrupted again...
“We have a culture based on ethics, and doing what’s right,” Stumpf said to the committee. “I stand with the people who are doing the right thing.”
Several lawmakers noted that despite Stumpf's emphasis on ethics, the bank has been hit with various fines over the past decade, including some linked to the housing crash."

Wednesday, August 31, 2016

Drugs And Privilege: Big Business, Congress And The EpiPen; Huffington Post, 8/31/16

Michael Winship, Huffington Post; Drugs And Privilege: Big Business, Congress And The EpiPen:
"[Mylan CEO Heather Bresch] should resign for price gouging rather than get a raise, but like so many of her fellow executives Bresch sails serenely on as her fellow Americans drown in health care debt. Her career and the success of her company epitomize everything that so enrages every voter who believes that the fix is in and that the system is weighted in favor of those with big money and serious connections...
And even at half-price, the cost of an EpiPen remains an outrage. In fact, some estimate that the dose of epinephrine used in the injector may really cost as little as a dollar.
In other words, this is one more, big old scam — yet another case of big business trying to pull the wool over the citizens’ eyes and pick our pockets while the government and our politicians mostly look the other way.
The Mylan mess is the cozy relationship between regulators and the regulated in a nutshell. Throughout government, politics and business, cash contributions are made, connections are used, strings are pulled and favors are requested and returned. So the system wins again, corrupt as hell.
But take notice. Realize that the rest of us are more and more aware of how we’re being had — and that we truly must be heard and heeded. Unless the tiny-hearted, gold-digging CEOs of America’s corporations and our leaders get the dollar signs out of their eyes and come to their senses, they are writing a prescription for an angry public response that not even their bought-and-paid-for Congress can hold at bay."

Monday, August 29, 2016

Your privacy doesn’t matter at the U.S. border; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 8/29/16

Noah Feldman, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; Your privacy doesn’t matter at the U.S. border:
"The lesson from all this isn’t just that you approach a border at your own risk. It’s that major exceptions to our basic liberties should be interpreted narrowly, not broadly. Searching a reporter’s phone or anyone’s data isn’t within the government’s plausible set of purposes.
There are two ways to fix the problem. One is for Congress to pass a law that prohibits such border searches, as was proposed unsuccessfully in 2008 and 2009.
If Congress won’t act, though, it’s up to the Supreme Court to repair the damage it did in 1886 and 1977. It doesn’t need to overturn its precedent, just narrow it to cover the circumstances that Congress actually had in mind in 1789, namely border searches for goods being shipped illegally or without duty. That doesn’t include data. It would be a big improvement in constitutional doctrine — and civil liberties."

Thursday, August 25, 2016

Mylan to provide EpiPen cost assistance as CEO is asked to testify on price hike; Guardian, 8/25/16

Jana Kasperkevic, Guardian; Mylan to provide EpiPen cost assistance as CEO is asked to testify on price hike:
"Even as Mylan takes steps to make its EpiPen more affordable, lawmakers have called on Bersch to appear before US Congress and explain why the price of EpiPen went up by 461% since Mylan acquired it in 2007.
“We are concerned that these drastic price increases could have a serious effect on the health and well-being of every day Americans,” senators Susan Collins and Claire McCaskill told Bresch in a letter. “As leaders of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, we are particularly concerned that seniors have access to EpiPen because, according to Mylan’s website, older Americans ‘may be at an increased risk of having a more severe anaphylactic reaction if they are exposed to biting and stinging insects’.”
They requested that Bresch testify within the next two weeks.
Even as Mylan was announcing the steps that it is taking to make its EpiPen more affordable, Sarah Jessica Parker issued a statement announcing that she had terminated her relationship with the company. Earlier this year, the Sex and the City actress served as a spokesperson for Mylan, helping raise awareness about anaphylaxis and life-threatening allergies."

Monday, August 22, 2016

Record Crowds And A Growing List Of Challenges As America's National Parks Turn 100; Here & Now, WBUR, 8/22/16

[Podcast] Here & Now, WBUR; Record Crowds And A Growing List Of Challenges As America's National Parks Turn 100:
"The National Park Service is planning a huge celebration this week in Yellowstone to honor the centennial of the America’s park system. Visits are booming, but American parks are also facing problems, including a multibillion-dollar maintenance backlog.
Here & Now’s Jeremy Hobson discusses with parks director Jonathan Jarvis.
Guest
Jonathan Jarvis, director of the National Park Service. He tweets @JonsMoustache. The park service tweets @NatlParkService."

Friday, March 25, 2016

Congress seeks to update student data privacy law; FedScoop, 3/22/16

Yizhu Wang, FedScoop; Congress seeks to update student data privacy law:
"Federal lawmakers are intent on updating an education privacy law that hasn't been overhauled in more than 40 years – but they are unsure about how to go about it.
The House Committee on Education and the Workforce held a hearing Tuesday with state technology leaders, education researchers, parent groups and advocates, to gather information about how schools are protecting student data and the vulnerabilities that still exist. Legislators specifically addressed the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, which was established in 1974 and revised in 2012 to protect kids' emails and other means of online identification."

Wednesday, April 29, 2015

Legislators Introduce Student Digital Privacy Bill; New York Times, 4/29/15

Natasha Singer, New York Times; Legislators Introduce Student Digital Privacy Bill:
"Months after President Obama proposed to strengthen digital privacy protection for students, two legislators on Wednesday introduced a comprehensive bill in Congress intended to accomplish that goal.
Titled the Student Digital Privacy and Parental Rights Act of 2015, the bill would prohibit operators of websites, apps and other online services for kindergartners through 12th graders from knowingly selling students’ personal information to third parties; from using or disclosing students’ personal information to tailor advertising to them; and from creating personal profiles of students unless it is for a school-related purpose.
The bill would give parents access to information held about their children and allow them to correct it; to delete information about their children that schools do not need to retain; and to download any material their children have created."