Tag Archive | Legislation and Congress

Passing the buck on location tracking

by Keith Perine, Politico Pro, May 3, 2012

When it comes to police access to cellphone location data of suspects, Congress has left the courts holding the bag. The high-stakes privacy debate over law enforcement tracking citizens using geolocational data is one Congress — despite a few bills and a hearing on the horizon — isn’t likely to resolve anytime soon. Lawmakers have left it to the courts, while the Supreme Court seemed to toss it back to the Hill recently. …

For full text of the article, visit Passing the buck on location tracking – Keith Perine – POLITICO.com.

Advertisements

A code of conduct for apps

by Tony Romm, Politico.com, May 20, 2012

As smartphone-crazed consumers fiddle with Angry Birds and challenge each other on Words With Friends, policymakers are playing a different game: bringing order to mobile apps. To Washington, the daily deals tools, social networks and other programs that consumers download onto their smartphones present new challenges to consumer privacy and security. Lawmakers are keenly aware of the horror stories of apps surreptitiously accessing user address books or broadcasting location data sans permission. …

For full text of the article, visit A code of conduct for apps – Tony Romm – POLITICO.com.

Congressional Hearing on: H.R. 2168, the “Geolocational Privacy and Surveillance Act”

Hearing on: H.R. 2168, the “Geolocational Privacy and Surveillance Act,” Thursday 5/17/2012 – 10:00 a.m. at 2141 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. Details pending. Visit Hearing on: H.R. 2168, the “Geolocational Privacy and Surveillance Act” for more information.

Various op-eds on the issue:

MAPPS Promotes “Map It Once, Use It Many Times” Act

At the prompting of MAPPS, Rep Doug Lamborn (Co-5) introduced HR 4233, Map It Once, Use It Many Times Act, in the U.S. House of Representatives on March 21, 2012. This bill was referred to several congressional committees. The following summary was written by the Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan arm of the Library of Congress, which serves Congress.

Map It Once, Use It Many Times Act – Establishes the National Geospatial Technology Administration in the Department of the Interior. Directs the Administrator of the National Geospatial Technology Administration to: (1) establish a National Geospatial Database of all U.S. owned or managed lands (including public lands), Indian trust parcels, and non-federal lands in each state; and (2) determine whether any U.S. owned or managed property may be better managed through ownership by a non-federal entity. Requires the Administrator to implement the recommendations of the National Geospatial Data Plan developed by the National Geospatial Policy Commission established by this Act. Requires the Administrator to promulgate standards for ensuring the interoperability of geospatial data collected by or with the support of the federal government. Transfers to the Administrator all geospatial functions vested by law in the Department of the Interior, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) with respect to the National Forest System, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Read More…

Supreme Court Relies on Kerr’s Theory of Fourth Amendment and Property

As noted by Professor Daniel Solove, Orin Kerr is cited by the Supreme Court in both the majority opinion and in a concurring opinion of US v Jones for his article, The Fourth Amendment and New Technologies: Constitutional Myths and the Case for Caution, 102 Mich. L. Rev. 801 (2004).  The majority opinion relies heavily on Orin’s theory of the Fourth Amendment and property that he sets forth in the first part of his article.

The Fourth Amendment and New Technologies: Constitutional Myths and the Case for Caution

by Orin S. Kerr, George Washington University – Law School, 102 Mich. L. Rev. 801 (2004)

 Abstract: This article argues that courts should approach the Fourth Amendment with caution when technology is in flux. When a technology is new or developing rapidly, courts should adopt modest formulations of Fourth Amendment protections that recognize the effectiveness and institutional advantages of statutory privacy protections.

The cautious approach is justified on three grounds. First, caution is consistent with existing judicial practice. The reasonable expectation of privacy test generally has been used by the courts as a term of art that remains closely tied to property law concepts. When a technology implicates privacy but not property, current judicial practice tends to avoid broad interpretations of the Fourth Amendment.

Read More…

US Government Looking To Lower Landsat Costs

By Debra Werner, Space News, January 20, 2012

U.S. government agencies are working together to look for ways to reduce the cost of future Landsat missions as a result of congressional direction included in the 2012 budget passed in December. “Although Congress has provided $2 million to the U.S. Geological Service for Landsat 9 program development, they have also requested that the Administration re-examine how to proceed with future Landsat missions,” Jon Campbell, spokesman for the Interior Department’s U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), said in a Jan. 10 email. … U.S. President Barack Obama requested $48 million for USGS to pave the way for development of Landsat 9 and Landsat 10, spacecraft designed to extend the Landsat program’s 40-year record of providing moderate-resolution imagery on global agriculture, land use and natural disasters. …

For full text of the article, visit US Government Looking To Lower Landsat Costs | SpaceNews.com.

New CRS Report on Federal Networking and IT Research and Development Program

English: Seal of the United States Congression...

The Federal Networking and Information Technology Research and Development  Program: Background, Funding, and Activities

by Patricia Moloney Figliola, Congressional Research Service, January 13, 2012

SUMMARY: In the early 1990s, Congress recognized that several federal agencies had ongoing high performance computing programs, but no central coordinating body existed to ensure long-term coordination and planning. To provide such a framework, Congress passed the High-Performance Computing and Communications Program Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-194) to enhance the effectiveness of the various programs. In conjunction with the passage of the act, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) released Grand Challenges: High-Performance Computing and Communications. That document outlined a research and development (R&D) strategy for high-performance computing and a framework for a multiagency program, the High-Performance Computing and Communications (HPCC) Program. The HPCC Program has evolved over time and is now called the Networking and Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD) Program, to better reflect its expanded mission.

Read More…

%d bloggers like this: