tonight on our t.v.'s cyber security web just gone a little more tangled the new system proposal just passed the house moments ago the next stop and maybe the final stop the u.s. senate and that's because president obama is threatening to veto the bill altogether we'll bring you the latest in the great cyber debate. and protests turned violent yet again in montreal students out to teach canadian government a lesson all of this in opposition to wish an hikes it's economics one hundred one and the only question is will the government listen. to. you. and in the windswept deserts of arizona a storm is brewing the spanish community and civil rights activists are protesting the crackdown on illegal immigrants all the while thousands of miles away the fate

of america's tough immigration law is being decided by the supreme court but why and force tougher restrictions now when legal immigration raids illegal immigration rates that is are actually dropping will explore. and that cyber advocates say puts our civil liberties at stake this evening the cyber security bill known as sister passed in a house vote of two forty eight to one sixty eight the cyber intelligence sharing and protection act allows companies to give private customer information to the government and this includes the national security agency be f.b.i.

and the department of homeland security during the debate in massachusetts congressman became worked up over the proposed law. now let's talk about what this bill would do could company share personal information about consumers with other companies even if information had nothing to do with cybersecurity yes would companies be free from y. ability if they share that personal information of every american you know could the government use personal information to spy on americans yes and while supporters say the legislation is needed to stop cyber espionage the online community is outraged over what the bill could do to citizens on line freedoms given the obama administration is now coming out against it here's part of that official statement say it's quote without clear legal protections and independent oversight information sharing legislation will undermine the public's trust in the government as well as in the internet by undermining fundamental privacy

confidentiality civil liberties and consumer protections for the reason stated here read if h r three five two three were presented to the president his senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill now that the now that the bill has headed to the senate we want to know what exactly this means for your privacy to discuss all of this i was joined earlier by trevor ten activist for the electronic frontier foundation and i asked him what this all means for citizens on line privacy here's what he had to say. well this base this bill is basically written so broadly that it creates a huge cyber security exception for all our existing privacy laws so right now there are many laws in place that say the government needs a warrant some sort of judicial review before you get your communications and companies can only reach your communications in very specific situations they have to keep your privacy in mind and so there's going to destroys all that so companies will be able to read your communications like the representative markey was saying

in your intro reacher communications and pass them along to the government voluntarily the government can read them without a warrant and then they can go ahead and use them for other purposes well these communications can be passed on to intelligence agencies and the military which are usually barred from spying on americans so the bills provisions are extremely broad and go well beyond cyber security needs and now what this bill trump existing laws that aim to protect citizens privacy exactly so there are there are many laws like the wiretap act electronic you can communications privacy act that say specifically the government needs judicial review to get communications of of citizens and what this bill does it says there's a phrase that says notwithstanding any other law which means it overrides all existing laws that are already on the books just with one little phrase of the congressional research service

a nonpartisan research arm of congress even warned congress in a report against ever using this phrase in a bill because it could have such extreme consequences now all these things are being debated on the floor today backers want to come up with a way to make it more acceptable tom and privacy advocates like yourself as their way to tweak our fix the belt to make it more reasonable. oh there are many ways to tweak the bill is make it more reasonable unfortunately the authors of the bill are doing none of these mike rogers who is a republican from mission. and. although this bill and he and he submitted a handful of amendments that would do just that unfortunately he's being misleading at best lying and worse because none of his amendments address any of these problems that we've we've mentioned here tonight and worse there are amendments on the table that would do a really good job of kind of an error in the focus that it would force the companies to anonymize information others want to know up the says the government

would get a warrant to get individual information or there is one that says the n.s.a. couldn't get ahold of this information ever and have we have to stay in domestically but mike rogers isn't allowing any of these substantial and that's to come up for a vote so on the one hand he's saying that he's concerned about privacy but on the other he's not allowing substantial and six comes to the house floor now there are major companies that are supporting this bill corporations like google and facebook these companies oppose so but they are backing cispa why is that what do they have to get a. well first of all google actually isn't supporting this bill this is another misleading statement i have by mike rogers they've been talking to him about it trying to narrow the civil liberties are trying to help with civil liberties concerns but they haven't supported it facebook did support the bill but again they have also expressed expressed civil liberties concerns and the parts of the bill that we are worried about facebook actually came out and said that they don't want

and they don't either and they won't use them if the bill comes to fruition and they said that they weren't even the reason they signed up for the bill in the first place they just want information to come from the government they want to give that mission to the government so it really goes to show that these provisions actually are needed all facebook with would like this bill just as much of that if these provisions were just removed completely so well companies may support it in general because they're worried about cyber threats which is a legitimate concern that they're not on board with these privacy invasive provisions that would essentially all the government unfettered access to a lot of our communications so trevor and this bill it is up for a vote tomorrow what are the chances of it passing and if it does pass what can we expect the obama administration to deal with that well mike rogers has been stating for a week that he's very confident it will pass but in the last few days we've seen an

extraordinary amount of increase in opposition to this bill not just civil liberties for the whole host of actors from iran security experts to even free market groups conservative free market groups you know the obama administration is on the same side as ron paul is in this issue and so hopefully when the vote comes out tomorrow they will vote it down if these concerns aren't substantially addressed but even if it is hopefully. it won't become law either because obama did come out and issue if you chose threat to his credit and said this bill wasn't a cyber security bill is actually an intelligence bill it is essential with us in that statement that this information would be going to places that never should and so hopefully no matter what happens on friday that this will never become law now even if cispa doesn't pass i guess the question now is what's coming next week so we saw they were both shot down after this firestorm of opposition to these bills now we see says by some people say it's worse than than both of those bells is is

this the beginning of more bills like this that we can look forward to that that. could curtail our freedoms online. well i think congress has definitely had its i don't regulate it or for the last few years we will see more bills come to the forefront and they try to do that in different ways this is different and so as because so it was about copyright censorship this is more about privacy and surveillance still very serious issues more serious perhaps. but we do see that people are starting to pay more attention which is great news and there are cocked contacting their congressmen early and the congress is now force forced to listen after the super debates before this over the base congress didn't want to go she they didn't want to listen to users but now they're realizing they have to and so despite the fact that congress may try to continue to pass these bills at least we know we have voice now and we can keep fighting and it actually

can work i will be keeping a close eye on the developments there on the house floor on this bill that was trevor ten activists with the electronic frontier foundation well a student that has reportedly surpassed one trillion dollars in the u.s. students in canada are also fed up with the rising cost of tuition and they're taking it to the streets again eighty five people were arrested in monterrey thousands protest that plan to wish and hikes this follows a similar protests happen last friday we told you about the call back government now says it will resume talks with students it's up and it's up in the air now as to whether or not that will actually happen and as of now tuition is set to go up the rate one hundred twenty five dollars a year earlier i was joined by citizen journalism bernard. i asked him what led up to the arrest of dozens of students. well. basically students were excluded yesterday by the minister for i heard you say that the minister is

the minister and we're going to resume negotiation but there's no guarantee to that effect the students want to resume negotiations but yesterday the minister of education in charge of universities and colleges excluded the major association the student association in chair in which represents about one hundred thousand students excluded them from the negotiations sold it to other associations because there are three of them representing one hundred eighty thousand students. together with the expelled association and decided also to not attend the goetia until the minister except everybody around the table and that led to spontaneous protest last night in the streets of montreal probably over ten thousand students took to the streets immediately and there were some some incidents.

but most of the time the point testers will target banks police stations media cars also and and members of parliament offices but there were relatively minor incidents windows broken and then some vehicles vandalized but the police is using that as a pretext to conduct massive repression and usually the ones who will break your window or another once you get caught the police those that they run faster than the police the ones who get caught are peaceful protesters and people are are becoming infuriated by the behavior of the police to where it's peaceful protesters and there doesn't seem to be an end to this because. the minister doesn't want to. the government doesn't want to discuss at all. still on the program is still

supposed to be applied in september and it's not only the students but a lot of major i would say a large part of the population including well known politicians. are against and then they are condemning the government right now i know there were a lot of harassed there overnight how are the students reacting is there is a crackdown kind of forcing them to back down or is it feeling the fire always fueling the fire definitely it will not stop this as profound the ramifications of people knowing that students are not stupid then there are a large part of the population understand very well that those tuitions he hikes have their roots in the financial crisis of two thousand and eight and even more profound rule the roost in the triumph of neo liberalism in the eighty's with regulation the financial markets and so people understand that. there is

a. big missed contempt of people who are very discontent i mean people are very unhappy about the way their political elites are behaving and the feel that the government is not serving the people at all it's only serving big financial interests and that's why it's not going to go away and it actually on sunday you know i'm sunday there were two hundred fifty thousand people jennings's to use in montreal protesting and it was supposed to be earth day but i i was there and i saw more signs against the government than anything else it was not strictly about the environment and protecting your and they were preventive arrest but they did for a side of the morning a group of native. people and stephanie says militants were protesting peacefully in front of the convention center in montreal and they were

arrested ninety of them were arrested without having done anything it was the call that preventive arrests and they're all given fines or not just arrested them and really. the staff during the really preventive mother very good and fines of one hundred and forty four dollars i believe and so this is all those are all very repressive minutes and it's only going to fuel more and more and more people are going to join this eventually. that was citizen journalist bernard day sunny day. the supreme court has heard arguments in the case of arizona's controversial immigration law the way it plays out in supreme court could set the tone for immigration laws in several other states amid all this we want to take a moment to look at the consequences of this law especially after new footage brings a natori escapes back into the limelight and shows police tasing an immigrant to death take

a look. it's hard to see there because it's dark but you can hear you can hear as a crowd of age and swarmed around on the stars you know hernandez was on the ground as the officers continued to tase him police earlier said that hernandez his behavior justified the use of force but this video britain that all into question for the discussion ira zone is immigration law and its consequences i was joined earlier by author and activist kevin powell he is the author of the book barack obama ronald reagan and the ghost of dr king here is his take. well to understand and i've been to arizona many times that a lot of folks would cheerfully the latino community has been rare effected by this you know to feel like every time you step out of your house be you walking down a street or driving if you're going to be stopped and not just stopped summarily but asked for identification and prove that you're

a citizen i mean that kind of undermines what it is to be democratic society and i think the people you know the stand is the law it's not just in arizona but it's actually spread around the country you know most probably in the last couple months in the state of alabama as well so this is something that has national implications and political should as presidential cycle election cycle now this infamous case now infamous case of trayvon martin the teenager shot dead by a neighborhood watchman has put this issue of racial profiling back into the spotlight but did this make this law make racial profiling a legal. well you know it's debatable you know if you have people in a latino community or the black community or the community feel that they're constant under surveillance absolutely and it's it's really not what our country should be about and i can tell you as someone myself who's been the victim racial profiling is not it's not a situation you want to have to live in and i mean back to the immigration case i just think america you know the stand that our country was built on the bastion

immigrants except for slavery everyone in this country has come from somebody somewhere else or their own desire to be in this kind of societies that are very society and i think it's unfortunate that this is being debated by the highest court in atlanta and get the chance to the effect a lot of people in this country now the obama administration as a. debating this law are opposing this law rather the basis that this conflict between state and federal law but is the issue really racial and ethnic discrimination well i think that the issue is doing believe in the rights of people to immigrate to this country who are law abiding citizens who are working hard many of the children who are in this country they're paying to the taxes etc you know they have a right to be full citizens overtime and i think that has to be a process in place for that and again this country was built on the back to the river and so forth sale of a sudden we want to seal our borders and not let people in and one of the mythologies that the whole world wants. immigrates america that's not true but

there are people who want to come here and they should have the right to be here and kevin we just showed up a little while ago that very disturbing video of the man being paid to death just one of the several people killed on the border we're looking at him now to what extent are agents held accountable for their actions actions that sometimes turn deadly well i mean look at san diego california where they have these ice raids look at what's been going on in states like connecticut where they've been brazen people's lives i mean there's been over zealousness. the people that i encountered in new york city which is full of evergreen hardworking mostly law abiding folks and i think that as long as that there is a process in place where people are working in the. laws here and they are actually making an effort to become citizens in this country i support immigration rights one hundred percent and i think that when we take it to the next level and actually are blue i think people that's saying something very ugly about some us who are

supposed to be a law enforcement. and when it comes to some of the cases like like that case of that man pace to death a lot of questions surrounding what actually happened especially after this new video has been released why are more of these cases being prosecuted part of the problem is that a lot of folks who are immigrants who are not country are probably not willing to come for the price fearful of being deported and so they're not even willing to. talk about these issues that are affecting them and how they're some of them are being brutalized in certain ways with a case like this is caught on video that they've become about it but it's a lot of folks are afraid of what might happen so they actually say something about how they're treated by certain law enforcement officials now people like republican presidential candidate mitt romney he's going to argue that something needs to be done about the immigration problem in america and it is a very hot button issue today what do you say to those that believe maybe this is the only way to deter people from illegally entering the u.s. i say that we as americans lose the moral high ground where we engage in that kind

of behavior it is a way to administer immigration laws and give people the space to become citizens if they want to become citizens without having to turn to this violence towards people we lose our humanity in the process and i don't think that's the solution all right thank you very much for coming on the show that was kevin powell author and activist. well you know the mantra of less is more and some people are taking that saying very seriously it's called the tiny house movement and it's a growing trend in the us people are cramming all their earthly possessions into houses the size of some bathrooms no mortgages no foreclosures and no one to answer to have these people found the key to making at through these trying economic times and they did make mansions are the producer meghan lopez introduces us to people who say when it comes to owning a home bigger isn't always better. it was the quintessential american dream

get a stable job buy a big house in the suburbs with a white picket fence and fill it with a couple of kids and maybe even a dog but these days the real american dream just may look like this or this or even this it's all part of a growing trend in the u.s. known as the small house movement and it asks americans to do something that is quite an american who live within their means during the recession or in times and to be more conservative and we tend see to reduce our costs more about ways to do that and smaller home with a lower price associated with it since the one nine hundred fifty s. the size of the typical household has doubled the paradigm here in america has been . that bigger is better but in the last couple years that has proven to be not the case when the housing bubble burst it took with it the dreams and homes of millions of americans and left many families choosing between putting food on the

table or paying for the roof over their heads and others looking for a better solution i think it's a better way to live i really do i think that it makes you appreciate. what you have more i think it gives you more time to do the things you want to do me rebecca when i'm owner of this a seven hundred twenty square foot house in carlisle pennsylvania it's a third of the size of a typical household and yet for her family it's home it forces you to truly live with the people that you make your family with rather than isolating yourself to different parts of the house with twenty three percent of homeowners owing more on their houses than the property is actually worth these days and foreclosures are rising again in march that idea might be catching on so with a stagnant economy that's going nowhere fast there are huge advantages associated with unburdening yourself with those traditional costs of ownership and really

that's what you do when you except in very very small home this is my money come on it perhaps no one knows this better than jay shafer he invented tumbleweeds tiny houses for one basic reason i was tired of paying for more apartment than i really needed any more rent and i couldn't really afford a mortgage so i built myself a tiny house this is jay's house measuring it just ninety seven square feet it is one of the smallest houses in the us because his month's right is if you're living with just what you need and nothing extra and everything is working for you still living small is actually just living more freedom so while millions of americans are struggling with the large price tag associated with owing a big home people like rebecca n.j. living in houses like this are still pursuing the same american dream but in a little smaller of a package reporting and carlisle pennsylvania meghan lopez r t. earlier

actually spoke with kiersten derksen she's the director of the documentary we at the tiny house people i asked her if she thought the tidy house move when it was a growing trend take a listen. i definitely think so i mean there's there's a lot of people that have been living this way for a long time now but the numbers of people that are choosing to live in very very very small homes is is growing according to people i've talked to bloggers that blog on tiny homes. and builders so i think it's definitely catching on and we saw in that story there some of the houses were on wheels and i understand that's because there's regulations against houses being too small. yeah . there are regulations it's pretty complicated because you can fit things under what jay jay shafer who i talked to in my documentary mentions that. the way he got

around building codes was minimum size standards which say that you need one room which is at least one hundred twenty square feet which he doesn't have that's maybe once where feet are was moving in that. around that he needed to travel to travel trailer which is to put it on wheels and so a lot of people are doing that type of thing. you know but it's complicated because you could then. sized under four hundred square feet which is you know over one is for a mobile home and so it's a it's a big sort of and cares and what's behind those regulations why can't our home be deemed too small i mean i think it's it's you know he can there's probably a lot of reasons. even jay talks about some regions in. but you know that there are also things about just we know how taxes are set up you know so what it would have to do better people paying in taxes or you know it's a really complicated topic i don't get into that as much i like to look at how people are living and how people are choosing to be very creative. and the way that

people are living i guess in the tiny house movement doesn't it kind of go against american values you know that whole kind of. zoomer a spare ad where you know you you get a house in the suburbs and you have cared and you have your two point five care than a dog does this kind of go against some of those traditional values plow ahead that's engine question i mean i think in some ways it's very american if you look about how to look at how you know americans are really had to pull and we came and we were we were pioneering i mean if you look at you know the people who were at least the british settlers i mean it depends if you're talking about but you know were the pioneers who came and built you know and if they log cabins or before log cabins but it was a way i mean my ancestors i saw their home this summer in new england and and

they had to build to a certain size and that certain size was one hundred twenty square feet so you know they hadn't reached that because it sort of went he just wasn't really very practical to build too big. heating and just the construction of it so i mean i don't think that it's i mean i think people have got this idea that big mansions are american. but i think that's also not realistic for a lot of people they can afford to live that way they can afford to heat the home you know as jay shaper said the day he lived he grew up in a four thousand square foot home and they could afford to heat it so i think people are maybe rethinking about what it is they really want and you want to be sort of. you know. owned by your home or do you want to have that freedom which i think is something americans want the freedom to live as you'd like to live and they think there's some of this has something to do with the financial crisis that people are kind of saying hey i don't want that mcmansion i want to live within my means and live in a tiny house. yeah i did and i think it is that that that that has affected some

people not our many people before the financial crisis we're doing this but i think there are some people and it's and i've interviewed a couple of them and in videos with a few people. that particularly one woman who contacted me and she actually found a video for me that has now had over a million visits so really popular i think people really relate to her and she you know that used to live in two thousand five hundred square foot home and they downsized to three hundred twenty square feet and they have a son and he sleeps in a loft and you know loves it. and they actually a really happy that so it was a choice that is certainly made i mean they couldn't really afford to keep living in something so big but now they're they're really quite happy with with how they're living. so you get this documentary would you ever live in a tiny house having seen where we've well actually when i first moved to barcelona we lived with my husband i lived in what it was.