instaPoll: Do you believe an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy is violated when the government collects their metadata without suspicion that they have done something wrong?

Send me an email | Forward to a Friend

The debate regarding the government's collection of information for national security purposes versus the American peoples' constitutional right to privacy continues to grow.  First, questions arose as to whether the information was even being collected.  Now, the debate is quickly turning to whether the collection is constitutional.   This week, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia examined the NSA's collection of telephony metadata, which includes, but is not limited to, the numbers of both parties on a call, along with location data, call duration, unique identifiers, and the time and duration of all calls. Metadata does not include the content of the communications.    Earlier this year, a court order was granted compelling Verizon Communications, Inc., on an "ongoing, daily basis," to provide the NSA with telephony metadata on its systems.  In response, I joined my colleagues in introducing legislation to require the Attorney General to share all court orders with Congress to provide much needed oversight. The court held that "because the government can use daily metadata collection to engage in repetitive, surreptitious surveillance of a citizen's private goings on, the NSA database implicates the Fourth Amendment each time a government monitors it."  Judge Richard Leon, who wrote the decision, said, "I believe that bulk telephony metadata collection and analysis almost certainly does violate a reasonable expectation of privacy."  Question of the week:   Do you believe an individual's reasonable expectation of privacy is violated when the government collects their metadata, along with the metadata of millions of other citizens, without any particularized suspicion that they have done something wrong?  ( ) Yes. ( ) No. ( ) I don't know.  ( ) Other. Take the Poll here. Find the results of last week's InstaPoll here.

 

Home | Contact | Forward to a Friend | Unsubscribe | Subscribe | Privacy | Office Locations
Please do not reply to this message. This email address does not accept incoming messages. To send an email, click here.

Click Here to view this email in your browser
Click Here to be removed from this list

instaPoll: Do you believe that the United States is safer today than it was just 2-3 years ago?

During an interview last weekend, the heads of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees both said that they do not believe our nation is safer than it was two years ago.   As they note, groups around the world are growing more hostile toward the United States, and dangerous technology is becoming more readily available to terrorists.  In order to combat these threats, we must maintain our technological and innovative advantage, ensuring that we have the resources and tools necessary to keep our law enforcement and the intelligence community safe, so they can keep us secure.  As House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI) said, "The pressures on our intelligence services to get it right, to prevent an attack, are enormous."  Particularly in a post-9/11 world, the federal government has a responsibility to ensure that the intelligence community is taking appropriate action to root out threats to the security of the American people, but must do so within the boundaries of the U.S. Constitution. Question of the week:   Do you believe that the United States is safer today than it was just 2-3 years ago?  ( ) Yes. ( ) No. ( ) I don't know.  ( ) Other. Take the Poll here. Find the results of last week's InstaPoll here.

 

Home | Contact | Unsubscribe | Privacy | Office Locations
Please do not reply to this message. This email address does not accept incoming messages. To send an email, click here.
Trouble viewing this email? See it in your web browser: http://forbes.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=XLPTKZF6WN4LGNMBPMJQFN63TA

Click Here to view this email in your browser
Click Here to be removed from this list

instaPoll: This week, as we reflect on all that we have to be thankful for, what are the things about our nation that make you the most grateful?

In 1863, President Lincoln declared a national day of thanksgiving, recounting the blessing bestowed upon this nation even during hard times.  This week, we invite constituents to share their reflections on what they are grateful for on our Facebook page, in their own words. Question of the Week: This week, as we reflect on all that we have to be thankful for, what are the things about our nation that make you the most grateful?  Share your comments on Randy's Facebook Page here. Find out the results of last week's instaPoll here.  Stay in Touch with Randy: Sign up for the Washington Update, a weekly review of Randy's work in Washington and find out what's on his mind by receiving the Capitol Monitor each week. Join the conversation with Randy and other neighbors across the Fourth District by visiting Randy's blog. Stay current by checking out Randy's Facebook page and subscribing to his Twitter feed.

 

Home | Contact | Unsubscribe | Privacy | Office Locations
Please do not reply to this message. This email address does not accept incoming messages. To send an email, click here.
Trouble viewing this email? See it in your web browser: http://forbes.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=HBR3BFZBKEIETF7Y7C7QYOKJH4

Click Here to view this email in your browser
Click Here to be removed from this list

Exclusive "2016" Update with Dinesh D'Souza

Update Profile / Unsubscribe

November 26, 2013 Dear Friends, I have some good news and some bad news. The good news is that this week is Thanksgiving, and we have a lot to be thankful for in America. We are living in a nation that is truly exceptional, and we still enjoy freedoms unlike those found anywhere else in the world. The American dream is still the dream of millions across the globe. The bad news is that there are those within our country that seek to undermine this exceptionalism and "take us down a notch." What's worse is that one of those people happens to be the President of the United States. When I directed 2016: Obama's America over a year ago, I prayed that I would be wrong. The damage that I predicted Obama would do to our country could never be worth an "I told you so." Unfortunately, I wasn't wrong. Wielding a weaponized national debt and a disdain for our standing in the world, President Obama draws us nearer and nearer to the dystopia that I warned against in 2016. Because of this rapid decline, I created a special, eight-minute update to 2016 that you need to see. This exclusive video just came out, and you can click here to view it right now. If you're fed up with our current president's disregard for the founders' vision of America, forward this email to a friend to share your access to the video. Sincerely, Dinesh D'Souza P.S. I want to hear from you! Leave your comments about the new video on my website.     Books •   Obama's America •   Godforsaken •   The Roots of Obama's Rage •   Life After Death •   What's So Great About Christianity •   The Enemy At Home •   Letters to a Young Conservative •   What's So Great About America •   The Virtue of Prosperity •   Ronald Reagan •   The End of Racism •   Illiberal Education Speaking Every year, I speak more than 50 times to businesses, churches, universities, and other groups about America, Christianity, Politics, and Apologetics. I've debated some of the leading thinkers including Peter Singer and the late Christopher Hitchens. To find out more or invite me to speak to your group, visit my Speaking page. Connect •   About •   Videos •   News •   Events •   Press •   Store •   Contact 2013 © Dinesh D'Souza

	5197 M Street Unit #36 Virginia Beach, VA 23462 United States

instaPoll: Do you believe that the United States should unilaterally reduce the tough sanctions it has placed on Iran in the hope that doing so will make a deal to disarm their nuclear program more likely?

Earlier this month, the Administration announced that it would support "limited, targeted, and reversible" easing of international sanctions against Iran if they agreed to halt their nuclear program. In July, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill strengthening and expanding existing U.S. sanctions.  Despite the strong bipartisan support for this legislation, the President urged Senate leaders this week to oppose enacting additional sanctions while the talks in Geneva are ongoing. The P5+1 negotiations with the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council – the United States, China, Russia, Britain, and France – plus Germany, began in October, and the next round of talks is scheduled to begin this week.  The goal of the negotiations is to reach an agreement regarding how to address Iran's nuclear program.  Question of the week:   Do you believe that the United States should unilaterally reduce the tough sanctions it has placed on Iran in the hope that doing so will make a deal to disarm their nuclear program more likely? ( ) Yes. ( ) No. ( ) I don't know.  ( ) Other. Take the Poll here. Find the results of last week's InstaPoll here

 

Home | Contact | Unsubscribe | Privacy | Office Locations
Please do not reply to this message. This email address does not accept incoming messages. To send an email, click here.
Trouble viewing this email? See it in your web browser: http://forbes.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=C7L6YEVV6HNSXZWAFUK2P4COFE

Click Here to view this email in your browser
Click Here to be removed from this list

instaPoll: Do you believe that it is constitutional for government meetings �� whether local, state or federal – to be opened with prayer?

This week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Town of Greece v. Galloway, a case challenging the constitutionality of prayer before town meetings. Since 1999, the town of Greece, New York has had a policy allowing members of the local clergy or local residents who wish to offer a prayer at the beginning of town council meetings to request to do so.  Two residents of the town filed a lawsuit challenging the policy as unconstitutional, saying they felt coerced to participate in the prayers and believed the prayers were primarily Christian.   Thirty years ago, the Court recognized that "opening of sessions of legislative and other deliberative public bodies with prayer is deeply embedded in the history and tradition of this country."   In doing so, the Court ruled that prayer before such meetings is constitutional as long as it does not serve to proselytize or disparage any faith or belief.  Question of the week: Do you believe that it is constitutional for government meetings – whether local, state or federal – to be opened with prayer? ( ) Yes. ( ) No. ( ) I don't know.  ( ) Other. Take the Poll here. Find the results of last week's InstaPoll here.

Home | Contact | Unsubscribe | Privacy | Office Locations
Please do not reply to this message. This email address does not accept incoming messages. To send an email, click here.
Trouble viewing this email? See it in your web browser: http://forbes.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=HQTI6SJFU2FSWPFI7PSFO4R5BA

Click Here to view this email in your browser
Click Here to be removed from this list

Press Release: Forbes Asks for His Pay to be Withheld, Cosponsors Bill to Reduce All Member Pay During Shutdown

Send me an email| Forward to a Friend

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 202-225-6365 10/02/13

Forbes Asks for His Pay to be Withheld, Cosponsors Bill to Reduce All Member Pay During Shutdown Washington, D.C. - Congressman J. Randy Forbes (VA-04) announced today that he has written to the Chief Administrator of the House of Representatives to request that his salary be withheld, and that he has cosponsored H.R. 3160, the Government Shutdown Fairness Act, which would withhold the salaries of Members of Congress until the funding impasse has ended and also reduce pay in future Congresses by the number of days the government is shutdown. Forbes has consistently voted against Member pay increases and introduced H.R. 284, the Congressional Accountability Pay (CAP) Act, which would make Members of Congress personally accountable for overspending in Washington, by tying the salaries of Members of Congress to growth in government spending.  The more the federal government spends, the less Members of Congress would earn.   In addition, Forbes has supported legislation that would require the President, Vice President, and political appointees to join Members of Congress and all congressional staff in obtaining health insurance through healthcare exchanges and eliminate any employer contribution to these health insurance purchases.  While nonessential congressional employees in Forbes' office have been furloughed as a result of the government shutdown, Forbes' offices are open and staffed with essential employees whose responsibility is to ensure constituents have a voice in the legislative process.  Phones are being answered from 7am - 7pm until Congress resolves the funding impasse. Read Forbes' work to stop Obamacare  Read Forbes' work to end a shutdown  ###

Home | Contact | Forward to a Friend | Unsubscribe | Subscribe | Privacy | Office Locations
Please do not reply to this message. This email address does not accept incoming messages. To send an email, click here.