to know exactly what does this mean for your online privacy and to discuss this i'm joined now by declan mccullagh news correspondent hi declan so first off want to get your reaction to the house passing this bill just moments ago. well it is just moments ago that this is really timely a few weeks ago i would have said this was a done deal that the vote would have been overwhelming but a combination of a veto threat you had some republicans like ron paul coming out against it even some committee chairmen and in the in the grassroots wave of opposition so that made the vote closer than it would have been but it still went through by a comfortable margin so it went through and definitely talk a little bit more about what this means for citizens online privacy well the impetus behind the bill the perfectly reasonable want and let's allow more information sharing from the federal government to the private sector you know the feds and secret weapon that's going to let companies fend off attacks from other countries russia and china keep getting mentioned that's great the problem is that the b

so we talked about inspecting that essentially in my mind means surveilling earlier i spoke with declan mccullagh a correspondent for c net news and got his reaction to this proposed solution take a look at where we have just a few paragraphs of the end of the new york times are describing how this works other words we this is not a fully fleshed out proposal this is just my view so i want to know details before committing to saying this is you know or this might might work but my quick reaction of if you really need to press me is that this is a little worrisome. you know the speech is what's sort of drill traffic to find the bad guys right but that's what's taking the microphone everyone's living room so you can listen to all the conversations and what has really been heard guys and that's was not something we do in the. u.s. other countries might so it seems like it could be pretty worrisome if we empower the national security agency the n.s.a. to do this so look at their history back in the one nine hundred sixty s. nine hundred seventy s. before the church commission and even in th

within our borders so i inspecting that means it's essentially surveilling our earlier spoke with declan mccullagh about this he's a correspondent for c.n.n. news and i his reaction to these proposed solutions take a look at where we have just a few paragraphs at the end of a new york times after to describe how this works are the words we use is not a fully fleshed out proposal is a just an idea so i don't know leigh sales before committing to say mrs you know or this might might work or but my reaction of if you're really going to press me is that this is a little worrisome when you know the picture is that what's sort of built traffic to find the bad guys right but that's basically a micro going every one's living room so you can listen to all the conversation the water's really good. guys that's not something we do in the u.s. other countries my so it seems like it could be pretty worrisome if we empower the national security agency the n.s.a. to do this to look at their history back in the one nine hundred sixty s. and one nine hundred seventy s. before the church commission and eve

potentially has the power to eclipse existing laws that protect people's privacy that's according to declan mccullagh a correspondent from c. that news. the most controversial section of cisco is the language that said notwithstanding any other portion of law companies can share in for what they want as long as it's for what they call a cybersecurity purpose now we have laws on the books that like from privacy laws federal education records laws medical records laws laws protecting the privacy of gun owners perhaps all these laws exist for a reason and so it's kind of weird to say we're just going to ignore each one of this becomes kind of this law that trumps the other ones a super law and let's let's at least have more debate about that at the end of the house leadership than even while amendments you know moments were proposed to get rid of that language that by itself is the most worrisome section but we want to know what you think about this story today at r t dot com we're asking how far you think the suspect legislation will actually get so far most voters nearly forty percent or so

they will of course follow the developments on this bill and how it plays out in congress that was declan mccullagh correspondent first seen at any of us. well five states in the northeast today holding primaries and as the race to be the next g.o.p. nominee drags on this year candidates have scrambled to appeal to the conservative base and for much of that base religion is a driving force and who they see fit to be the next commander in chief and we saw how much religious rhetoric came out of rick santorum then and we saw how he quickly rose as a top contender focusing not on the economy but on social issues but as you'll see there's another segment of america sick of religious talk from our politicians and it's fueling a growing movement and it's a campaign that was supposed to be centered around jobs and the economy i was the guy and so of problems and making critical decisions i don't believe in an america where the separation of church and state is absolute that religious rhetoric running rampant with social issues at the forefront rick santorum no longer in the race grows as a top c

borders so a by inspecting that is then surely means that surveilling let's talk about this now is declan mccullagh correspondent for c.n.n. news your reaction to this proposed solution by richard clarke. well we have to just a few paragraphs at the end of the new york times are just cry of how this works other words we this is not a fully fleshed out proposal was just an idea so i want to know the details before committing to saying this is you know or this might might work a but my reaction if if you really need to press me is that this is a little worrisome when you know the pitch is let's serbia all traffic to find the bad guys right but that's like sticking a microphone in everyone's living room so you can listen to all the conversations and not just re-emerge guys sometimes that's not something we do in the us other countries might so it seems like it could be pretty worrisome if we empower the national security agency the n.s.a. to do this a look at their history back in the one nine hundred sixty s. one nine hundred seventy s. before the church commission and even in the last deca

maybe all the hobnobbing here in washington is helping the tech giant out so joining me to discuss is declan mccullagh chief political correspondent for c.n.n. dot com thanks so much for joining us tonight and i guess first starters you know what's your take just on the f.c.c. this decision here in terms of a twenty five thousand dollars fine saying that google didn't really help out with the investigation by finding that they didn't violate any laws that kind of a slap on the wrist. well see it's not even a slap on our wrist i mean twenty five thousand dollars of the f.c.c. thought get google really did something wrong about twenty five million dollars find something to make them pay attention but sunny five sounds it is more is the f.c.c. thing we can't get away with anything more it's a weird outcome and i think the f.t.c. just trying to justify spending a lot of that time on this so what do you think about this now unredacted version of f.a.c.s. report that google put out there right i went and it's really interesting is f.c.c. wanted to cover some of this stuff up at the same time you h