Regulating Government Surveillance

902 Words2 Pages

With the rise of terrorism and an increase in international violence within the last decade and a half, the United States has tried to tackle the issue of privacy regulations and government surveillance. The issue at hand is whether the government or private intelligence agencies should be allowed to target individuals by tracking their actions and behaviors through technology. Does the United States government have the right to exchange peoples privacy for national protection? If so, should this right be passed onto the NSA or private agencies?
Following the 9/11 disaster, the issue of government surveillance has sparked a controversial debate. Today, technology has allowed certain government run programs to monitor peoples lives. Whether it’s through phone tapping, street cameras or even twitter statuses, the government can “watch over” it’s citizens to remove potential threats. However, over the years there have constantly been opposers to this infringement of personal privacy and whether it should be restricted or completely disbanded. Party opinions on this matter have flip-flopped between George W. Bush’s presidency and Barrack Obama’s. As a republican president, Bush had ordered the National Security Agency to secretly eavesdrop on Americans in an effort to find the sources of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This seemed to be a huge problem for many people as the program was first completely secret and furthermore did not require court-approved warrants. This program last about 3 years. Many Democratic politicians during the time accused the White House of passing down to much power to the N.S.A, allowing them to break domestic and international laws. They even received the nickname “No Such Agency,” becoming one of the worl...

... middle of paper ...

...enator Antonio Rubio. He has enforced the idea that government surveillance is a means of protecting peoples freedom and rights and that with strong intelligence agencies these rights are best protected. Rubio has stated that “every other country in the world, certainly those that are hostile to our interests, has robust intelligence programs.”
At the moment, their is little change when it comes to eliminating these programs. Even though many Americans feel uncomfortable that the government is “spying” on them, these programs remain an important aspect of the countries security. Domestically no huge terrorist attack has forced lawmakers to strengthen these policies but at the same time, coming out of two big wars in foreign countries, the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court have all chosen to stay on the safe side and continue to use metadata technologies.

Open Document