my question is for mr. jofr. you are concerned that the administration is conducting bulk collection of american communications. i was hoping you could explain that term and the evidence that this is occurring. >> when the push administration proposed it, they explained that one purpose of the statute was to allow for bulk collection meaning non-visitized collection. the government doesn't go to the court and say we want to target this person. instead it goes to the court and said we want to target people overseas and maybe we want to target everybody in this city or in this particular country. >> that can be from karachi or anywhere. >> absolutely. >> do you have evidence that this is occurring? >> this is something that came up in the case we are litigating right now and the administration was asking this question. by the could you state your name district and again by the appeals court. they had an opportunity to say they are being use and declined to take that opportunity. >> there would be enormous amounts o

mr. jofr is going to speak in a moment i know about the case clapper versus amnesty which was mentioned a moment ago. the question that arises is whether the american public has a well-founded fear and they might be subject to unlawful surveillance. we have to say at this point without better public reporting, we don't know. we don't know the s under which fisa authorities are used. we would recommend enhanced reporting and have additional suggestions as well we think would improve oversight and transparency o parnsy for the review. there check there is and reporting to the public is inadequate. we would urge you to consider the changes before reauthorization. >> thank you very much. mr. jafr? >> could you please turn your mike on. got it now. >> thank you for inviting me to share the aclu's concerns about the fisa amendments act. we urge you not to reauthorize the act in its current form and not to reauthorize in any form until the government discloses more about how the act has been used. in