senator frachken also mentioned a comment by former nsa director michael hayden. put simply, these generals recognize that saying someone on a service is being surveilled is very different from identifying who on that service is being surveilled and only the latter is dangerous to national security. therefore, the less transparent alternatives to the bill the government has suggested are unnecessary to protect national security. more than that, they would actually be worse than the current transparency status quo. on the government reporting side the dni has announced he will voluntarily public new statistics reflecting how many people have been, quote, targeted, unquote under various surveillance authorities. but such limited reporting would actually be misleading. for example, the dni's reporting for 2012 would only have indicated that around 300 people had their telephony metadata targeted under section 215 of the patriot act. w yet we know now know the government has used section 215 to obtain the phone records of every single person in the country. such false