Where's the NSA reform? Our view
After leaks last year revealed a vast web of government surveillance of innocent Americans, the outrage in Washington could hardly be contained.
Privacy advocates and lawmakers from both parties wanted the most intrusive program shut down. A federal judge called the technology it employs "almost Orwellian." The bipartisan Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, appointed by President Obama, found the program was illegal. And the president called for major changes.
Yet the program lives on.
The government is still collecting and storing telephone call records of tens of millions of Americans who have done absolutely nothing wrong. The "metadata" show who they call, when they call and how long they talk.
Obama's proposal last January — to leave the data with phone companies, instead of with the government — can't happen without a new law. And, as in so many other areas, the deeply divided Congress has failed to produce one.
One plan on the table goes a long way toward an overdue rebalancing of security and liberty. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., has teamed with some key conservatives, including Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, on a compromise that has drawn support from many of the warring parties: most privacy advocates, the tech industry, the U.S. attorney general and the director of national intelligence.
Data would be stored with the phone companies, instead of the government. Requests to phone companies would have to be far more limited.
The leading alternative to this plan, endorsed by the Senate Intelligence Committee, essentially preserves the status quo while tacking on some inadequate restraints against abuse.
Certainly, at a time of rising international tensions and threats from the Islamic State, it's important to preserve the government's ability to track communication among suspected terrorists.
But ever since the phone-record program's existence was confirmed last year by fugitive leaker Edward Snowden, top intelligence officials have oversold its benefits.
First they said the data, along with an intrusive e-mail program targeting foreign suspects, have helped disrupt more than 50 "potential terrorist events" since 9/11. A month later, those impressive claims were whittled back: Phone data "made a contribution" in just 12 cases. And when asked how often phone data were the "tip-off" to a plot, then-NSA Director Keith Alexander said he didn't know.
If the program's benefits are hazy, the costs are clear. Two weeks ago, several tech giants said concern about Internet privacy has hurt U.S. companies. They called for the government to rein in surveillance programs.
Whether this Congress has the courage to do so remains to be seen. With only a lame-duck session left after the Nov. 4 elections, time is not on the side of change. Nor is the threat from ISIL.
Choosing between privacy and security is never easy. But that's not the choice here. The compromise measure would allow access to phone records with some smart safeguards. Americans would be no less safe, and the values they cherish would be better protected.
USA TODAY's editorial opinions are decided by its Editorial Board, separate from the news staff. Most editorials are coupled with an opposing view — a unique USA TODAY feature.