To my email to her about not upholding the constitution and voting against the American people.
Michigan 10th district Candice Miller.
Dear Mr. Elsholz:
Thank you for contacting me regarding an amendment to H.R. 2397, the annual Department of Defense Appropriations Bill, seeking to defund intelligence-gathering efforts of the National Security Agency (NSA). I appreciate hearing from you on this issue, and I am pleased for the opportunity to respond to your concerns.
As you know, Representatives Justin Amash (R-MI) and John Conyers (D-MI) offered an amendment to the annual Department of Defense Appropriations Bill on July 24, 2013 which sought to restrict the capability of the NSA to collect information such as phone records under Section 215 of the Patriot Act. I heard from several of my constituents on this issue, and after careful consideration, I opposed the Amash-Conyers amendment because I believe it would have destroyed a vital tool that our government uses to defend our nation against foreign terrorists seeking to murder our fellow citizens. I also believe it went against the first and foremost Constitutional responsibility of the federal government, which is to defend America against our enemies.
I do not believe that the rights guaranteed by our Constitution extend to foreign terrorists, and our sacred rights should not provide them with any protection while they plot to kill our fellow citizens. I agreed with a recent editorial in the Wall Street Journal which stated that this amendment would "return America to a pre-9/11 mindset on fighting terror that treats terrorists as street burglars instead of enemies of our nation." I also agreed with the conservative Heritage Foundation, which stated that the Amash-Conyers Amendment takes "the wrong approach to an important question, is probably unwise and possibly un-Constitutional."
The program that this amendment would destroy has been credited with helping to stop 54 terrorist plots in 20 countries around the world against American citizens, American interests or those of our allies. On the other hand, the proponents of this effort have not come forward with a single instance of any American who has had his or her Constitutional rights violated, who has been wrongly charged with any crime, or has been harmed in any way. In my opinion, the threat to our civil liberties suggested by the Amash-Conyers Amendment is a phantom threat that does not exist. As my colleague on the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Michelle Bachmann, said, the sponsors of the Amash-Conyers Amendment are putting forward a false narrative.
One of the attacks that this program provided the key piece of information that allowed our intelligence and law enforcement officials to stop was the plot to explode bombs on the New York City subway system. That plot was led by an Afghan immigrant, Najibullah Zazzi, and other terrorists inside our country. The plot was discovered when Zazzi's phone number had been in contact with a known terrorist overseas, and it was thwarted just before it was set to take place. Law enforcement officials estimate that 1,000 or more Americans would have been killed if this brutal and evil attack had been carried out. Those are the facts, and many innocent men, women and children are alive today because this program allowed the government to connect the dots and stop this attack before the terrorists struck, just as it was admonished to do by the 9/11 Commission, to better protect our nation. That is real and just one example of the attacks avoided and lives saved due to this program.
I wonder how many dead Americans the supporters of the Amash-Conyers Amendment would be willing to accept in the effort to protect an alleged 4th Amendment protection for terrorists like Najibullah Zazzi. I say 'alleged' because the program in place does not violate the 4th Amendment protections of Americans. In the 1979 Smith v. Maryland decision, the Supreme Court ruled that telephone billing records were not protected by the 4th Amendment because they were the property of the phone company, not the individual. So the collection of phone metadata, such as number and duration of the call, to support this program violates no individual's rights under the 4th Amendment.
It is also disappointing the supporters of the Amash-Conyers Amendment put forward so much false and misleading information. Many led people to believe that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court, which maintains strict judicial oversight of the program, was allowing the NSA to gather not just metadata, but also the content of telephone conversations. This is simply untrue. All that is collected is phone numbers and duration of calls. No names, no addresses, and no content is attached to this information. They also led people to believe that the NSA has unfettered access to this information. This is also untrue. In fact, the NSA cannot even do a search of the data for a particular phone number unless they have a court order provided for a specific purpose. In 2012, there were fewer than 300 searches on this data; hardly a broad trampling of the rights of 360,000,000 Americans. The only numbers that are ever searched are those contacted by known terrorists overseas. I do not believe we should provide protections to those in our nation plotting with known terrorists from across the world.
The supporters of this amendment have also voted to release the terrorists being held at Guantanamo Bay and either send them back to their countries or bring them into American civilian courts for trial. I believe, once again, that this extension of Constitutional rights to some of the world's most heinous terrorists, including 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Muhammed, is wrongheaded, makes our nation less secure, is unprecedented in our nation's history and emboldens our enemies to make further attacks on American citizens and interests.
However, in order to effectively protect the Constitutional rights of Americans without endangering our national security, I am proud to have supported the Nugent-Pompeo Amendment to the Defense Appropriations Bill which states:
"None of funds made available by this Act may be used by the National Security Agency to—conduct an acquisition pursuant to section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 for the purpose of targeting a United States person; or acquire, monitor, or store the contents of any electronic communication of a United States person from a provider of electronic communication services to the public pursuant to section 501 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978."
The Nugent-Pompeo Amendment makes perfectly clear that the content of any communication of Americans within our nation are off limits to collection by the NSA under FISA, and it passed by a vote of 409-12.
The Amash-Conyers Amendment, on the other hand, would have limited the collection of data to only those individuals who are the subject of an investigation. This amendment does not mention Americans at all. Consequently, it would prevent the collection and analysis of all bulk data – not just the data of American citizens. The Amash-Conyers Amendment dictates that the NSA would not be able to collect and analyze bulk data from Yemen, Afghanistan, Egypt, Pakistan, or any other country around the world where people are actively working to murder innocent Americans. As Vice Chair of the House Homeland Security Committee, it is my experience that fighting terrorism is like finding a needle in a haystack. Terrorists live in the shadows and plot secretly. The Amash-Conyers Amendment would require that we find the needle, wherever it may be across the globe, before our intelligence officials could even look in the haystack.
I refuse to go back to the pre-9/11 mindset that provides those who seek to murder our fellow citizens space to plot and scheme in the shadows while tying the hands of those seeking to stop them. I believe that such an approach violates the first duty given to the federal government by the Constitution to provide for the common defense, as well as the oath I took to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.
For all of these reasons, I voted to defeat the Amash-Conyers Amendment when it was considered in the House, and it ultimately failed by a vote of 205-217. I can assure you I will continue to fulfill my Constitutional responsibility to provide for the common defense of our nation while also fully honoring the sacred rights enjoyed by every American.
Again, thank you for your correspondence. If you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. If you would like to stay up to date on issues in Congress and how they affect you, please sign up to receive my e-newsletter, The Washington Connection, at candicemiller.house.gov. It has all the information you need about current events in our nation's capital and their impact on Michigan's 10th Congressional District.
P.S. It is my sincere honor to represent you in Congress. My principal focus is making sure that we are addressing job creation and the economy, protecting our freedoms and expanding liberty. Thank you for taking the time to provide me with your input on helping to make our district and our nation stronger for the next generation.
Michigan 10th district Candice Miller.
Dear Mr. Elsholz:
Thank you for contacting me regarding an amendment to H.R. 2397, the annual Department of Defense Appropriations Bill, seeking to defund intelligence-gathering efforts of the National Security Agency (NSA). I appreciate hearing from you on this issue, and I am pleased for the opportunity to respond to your concerns.
As you know, Representatives Justin Amash (R-MI) and John Conyers (D-MI) offered an amendment to the annual Department of Defense Appropriations Bill on July 24, 2013 which sought to restrict the capability of the NSA to collect information such as phone records under Section 215 of the Patriot Act. I heard from several of my constituents on this issue, and after careful consideration, I opposed the Amash-Conyers amendment because I believe it would have destroyed a vital tool that our government uses to defend our nation against foreign terrorists seeking to murder our fellow citizens. I also believe it went against the first and foremost Constitutional responsibility of the federal government, which is to defend America against our enemies.
I do not believe that the rights guaranteed by our Constitution extend to foreign terrorists, and our sacred rights should not provide them with any protection while they plot to kill our fellow citizens. I agreed with a recent editorial in the Wall Street Journal which stated that this amendment would "return America to a pre-9/11 mindset on fighting terror that treats terrorists as street burglars instead of enemies of our nation." I also agreed with the conservative Heritage Foundation, which stated that the Amash-Conyers Amendment takes "the wrong approach to an important question, is probably unwise and possibly un-Constitutional."
The program that this amendment would destroy has been credited with helping to stop 54 terrorist plots in 20 countries around the world against American citizens, American interests or those of our allies. On the other hand, the proponents of this effort have not come forward with a single instance of any American who has had his or her Constitutional rights violated, who has been wrongly charged with any crime, or has been harmed in any way. In my opinion, the threat to our civil liberties suggested by the Amash-Conyers Amendment is a phantom threat that does not exist. As my colleague on the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Michelle Bachmann, said, the sponsors of the Amash-Conyers Amendment are putting forward a false narrative.
One of the attacks that this program provided the key piece of information that allowed our intelligence and law enforcement officials to stop was the plot to explode bombs on the New York City subway system. That plot was led by an Afghan immigrant, Najibullah Zazzi, and other terrorists inside our country. The plot was discovered when Zazzi's phone number had been in contact with a known terrorist overseas, and it was thwarted just before it was set to take place. Law enforcement officials estimate that 1,000 or more Americans would have been killed if this brutal and evil attack had been carried out. Those are the facts, and many innocent men, women and children are alive today because this program allowed the government to connect the dots and stop this attack before the terrorists struck, just as it was admonished to do by the 9/11 Commission, to better protect our nation. That is real and just one example of the attacks avoided and lives saved due to this program.
I wonder how many dead Americans the supporters of the Amash-Conyers Amendment would be willing to accept in the effort to protect an alleged 4th Amendment protection for terrorists like Najibullah Zazzi. I say 'alleged' because the program in place does not violate the 4th Amendment protections of Americans. In the 1979 Smith v. Maryland decision, the Supreme Court ruled that telephone billing records were not protected by the 4th Amendment because they were the property of the phone company, not the individual. So the collection of phone metadata, such as number and duration of the call, to support this program violates no individual's rights under the 4th Amendment.
It is also disappointing the supporters of the Amash-Conyers Amendment put forward so much false and misleading information. Many led people to believe that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court, which maintains strict judicial oversight of the program, was allowing the NSA to gather not just metadata, but also the content of telephone conversations. This is simply untrue. All that is collected is phone numbers and duration of calls. No names, no addresses, and no content is attached to this information. They also led people to believe that the NSA has unfettered access to this information. This is also untrue. In fact, the NSA cannot even do a search of the data for a particular phone number unless they have a court order provided for a specific purpose. In 2012, there were fewer than 300 searches on this data; hardly a broad trampling of the rights of 360,000,000 Americans. The only numbers that are ever searched are those contacted by known terrorists overseas. I do not believe we should provide protections to those in our nation plotting with known terrorists from across the world.
The supporters of this amendment have also voted to release the terrorists being held at Guantanamo Bay and either send them back to their countries or bring them into American civilian courts for trial. I believe, once again, that this extension of Constitutional rights to some of the world's most heinous terrorists, including 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Muhammed, is wrongheaded, makes our nation less secure, is unprecedented in our nation's history and emboldens our enemies to make further attacks on American citizens and interests.
However, in order to effectively protect the Constitutional rights of Americans without endangering our national security, I am proud to have supported the Nugent-Pompeo Amendment to the Defense Appropriations Bill which states:
"None of funds made available by this Act may be used by the National Security Agency to—conduct an acquisition pursuant to section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 for the purpose of targeting a United States person; or acquire, monitor, or store the contents of any electronic communication of a United States person from a provider of electronic communication services to the public pursuant to section 501 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978."
The Nugent-Pompeo Amendment makes perfectly clear that the content of any communication of Americans within our nation are off limits to collection by the NSA under FISA, and it passed by a vote of 409-12.
The Amash-Conyers Amendment, on the other hand, would have limited the collection of data to only those individuals who are the subject of an investigation. This amendment does not mention Americans at all. Consequently, it would prevent the collection and analysis of all bulk data – not just the data of American citizens. The Amash-Conyers Amendment dictates that the NSA would not be able to collect and analyze bulk data from Yemen, Afghanistan, Egypt, Pakistan, or any other country around the world where people are actively working to murder innocent Americans. As Vice Chair of the House Homeland Security Committee, it is my experience that fighting terrorism is like finding a needle in a haystack. Terrorists live in the shadows and plot secretly. The Amash-Conyers Amendment would require that we find the needle, wherever it may be across the globe, before our intelligence officials could even look in the haystack.
I refuse to go back to the pre-9/11 mindset that provides those who seek to murder our fellow citizens space to plot and scheme in the shadows while tying the hands of those seeking to stop them. I believe that such an approach violates the first duty given to the federal government by the Constitution to provide for the common defense, as well as the oath I took to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.
For all of these reasons, I voted to defeat the Amash-Conyers Amendment when it was considered in the House, and it ultimately failed by a vote of 205-217. I can assure you I will continue to fulfill my Constitutional responsibility to provide for the common defense of our nation while also fully honoring the sacred rights enjoyed by every American.
Again, thank you for your correspondence. If you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. If you would like to stay up to date on issues in Congress and how they affect you, please sign up to receive my e-newsletter, The Washington Connection, at candicemiller.house.gov. It has all the information you need about current events in our nation's capital and their impact on Michigan's 10th Congressional District.
P.S. It is my sincere honor to represent you in Congress. My principal focus is making sure that we are addressing job creation and the economy, protecting our freedoms and expanding liberty. Thank you for taking the time to provide me with your input on helping to make our district and our nation stronger for the next generation.
