Senators See Surveillance Payday, Not Privacy Loss
The Hill raises alarms about senators' 'privilege' regarding FBI surveillance, noting that intelligence committees grant members access to raw intelligence. This perspective, however, neatly sidesteps the more lucrative 'privilege': the financial incentives driving the expansion of these very surveillance powers. Take Senator Tom Cotton, for example, a staunch proponent of the FISA Section 702
reauthorization. Cotton received over $200,000 from defense and intelligence contractors in 2022 alone, according to OpenSecrets.org, including hefty sums from companies that directly benefit from increased data collection and analysis contracts. (Funny how those 'flawed laws' always seem to favor the well-connected.) One might wonder if the concern for Americans' privacy extends only as far as it
doesn't interrupt the steady flow of campaign contributions and defense industry profits. When politicians vote for policies that expand surveillance, which in turn leads to more government contracts for their donors, blaming 'flawed laws' feels a bit like blaming gravity for a dropped wallet. Perhaps the 'flaw' isn't in the law itself, but in a system that allows campaign finance to dictate the
extent of our constitutional rights.