sensenbrenner: mr. speaker, i'm pleased that the house of representatives today is considering h.r. 1944, the private property rights protection act, as part of stop government abuse week. my bill aims to restore the property rights of all americans the supreme court took away nine years ago. the founders of our country recognized the importance of an individual's right to personal property when they drafted the constitution. the fifth amendment states, quote, nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation, unquote. in key low vs. the city of new london, in a 5-4 decision, they said that economic development can be a public use under the fifth amendment's taking clause. the court held that the government could take private property from an owner to help a corporation or private developer. the now infamous kilo decision was met with swift opposition. as justice o'connor stated, quote, the government has the right to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those

so congress, through sensenbrenner and conyers and others, have responded to this and we have come up with a product which i think is very, very good. now, i saw "the wall street" editorial yesterday which i think is very, very disingenu s disingenuous. all we're saying here is when you demonstrate, that you are not being fair by people, you'll be covered. now the old law automatically covered about nine states, seven to nine, based upon how you define it. this one covers four, and it says to people, these are the incentives you have not to ever be covered, but if you volley this, you will be covered. so what's wrong with that? it's a good law. i hope we can come together and i hope eric cantor will, as a leader of the republicans, put this bill on the floor and let us have an up or down vote. >> i think that's the question, congressman. he spoke about his time with john lewis. this is the time to look at a law that martin luther king, of course, helped to get on the books. congressman james clyburn, thanks for talking to us today. >>> i want to turn to a winter storm pounding the mid

now he joins with -- congressman sensenbrenner.yeah he is joining with leahy in introducing what is called the usa freedom act. explain how the interest of conservatives come together with people across the political spectrum on this and what exactly the usa freedom act as. the bill is very much a bipartisan bill. it is extremely striking to see people who have been very far on either side of the political spectrum uniting in response to the nsa surveillance and pushing for a fairly extensive reform in the form of usa freedom act. this is a bill that is still in committee is still seeking cosponsors, but it seems to have a lot of momentum. the implication is this is a vehicle that my move forward and actually rein in national security agency abusers. the bill would do a variety of things. i would urge viewers to take some time to get to know it a little bit better. go through just a few of the things it would do, it would change the language of section 215 of the patriot act. that is the section of law the government is arguing tha

many, including congressman sensenbrenner, were surprised with the patriot act. he was a supporter. it is been described as one of the co-authors of the patriot act. he is offended at what they are saying the patriot act means. there needs to be some pushback. it is the fox guarding the hen house. that is why the president cannot really be correct or allowed to do what he is saying. he just goes to hire some more attorneys for the nsa. that is not the way it works. processss -- due requires and at the serial relationship. that is why my nsa reforms would allow you to repeal a court order. all youray give us phone records of they should be able to appeal that to a public court.the supreme i do not think a court -- a secret court should ever be deciding the constitutionality of a fourth amendment case in secret. that goes against everything our country was founded upon. >> that does raise one other issue. presidents and the question of when somebody has standing to be able to challenge a presidential executive order and whether a areer has that standing, you going to challenge it base

we actually have a specific legislative q the usa freedom act was written by representative sensenbrenner who wrote the patriot act and is now staying is being broadly misinterpreted, actually in secret courts and it's being misused to violate the constitution. and so we want people to call their representatives to support that bill that will rein in the nsa, a lot of aspects of nsa that we oppose. >>> a little sidetrack from that particular petition, do you mention the pry vac sector in it, it's been so much discussion of the nsa and all the data it's collecting, but private companies are doing it as well, i wonder if at some point, your going to start looking at what private companies are collecting about us, because they are not saying it either and the nsa hasn't done anything we know awful with the information but they -- private companies, i don't know. you don't know where they are going, all this stuff they are collecting about us. >> we are watching the private companies and have been for a very long time and we certainly have been urging them to release transparency reports abou

even jim sensenbrenner, i ranking republican on the committee of jurisdiction, who was the author, has expressed deep concerns and to worry about what has happened. he wants to revisit it. he wants to go back and figure out a way that we can better protect american citizens against this abuse of power. nonpartisan. -- if wee says this want a target on our backs, would this reduce the nsa spying? guest: i do not know. that is a separate question. the question of whether or not going into iraq or these foreign wars was a good idea. in hindsight, $1 trillion later and although i've lost, -- all of the lives lost, we should question whether this foreign venture them is worth the lives and the cost. fundamentally, is it good foreign policy? host: front page of the new york times -- look at this headline. spying by an ally and tangled a u.s. law form. the list of those caught up in the global net. headsocial media users to of state, now includes another entry. american lawyers. the government of indonesia had retained a law firm. he reports that the nsa's australian counterpart notify the ag

furthermore it could not be ignored that the author of the patriot act, representative jim sensenbrennerbeen quoted on saying on multiple occasions that congress would never have passed or twice reauthorized the patriot act had it known the full breadth of the nsa's snooping operation. the fact is, as usual, when you give the government an inch, they take a mile. we simply can't afford to play around with our most basic, fundamental human rights. back in may the 4 -- before the revelations of edward snowden came to light i introduced legislation to restore transparency, accountability and confidence to our national security apparatus. hr-1847, the electronic communications privacy act, is designed to increase protections for electronic communications, including personal e-mails, of u.s. citizens, and addresses the privacy concerns raised from the recent position that the irs took that the fourth amendment does not apply, and does not protect the privacy of personal, unopened e-mails because internet users do not have a reasonable expectations of privacy in such communications. clearly th

i recently joined with representative sensenbrenner to introduce a bipartisan voting rights act. we also face evermore complex methods of criminal activity. along with these rapid changes, the challenge to remain true to our core values of liberty, responseand government to the people. we live in the digital age. the challenges are even more acute. generateamericans enormous amounts of information about their lives with simple, routine tasks such as using a credit card, sending a text message, calling it friend, searching for directions on the web. as technology improves our life, the vast amount of data it revealing,remarkably formidable to exploitation -- vulnerable to exploitation. is there authority given in the constitution that empowers an executive agency such as the nsa to open, listen, or to see either the mail, phone conversations, or electronic communications of u.s. citizens simply by a blanket law? and from on, we treasure our privacy. -- in vermont, we treasure our privacy. governmentme wary of overreach or lax consumer protection in these laws. show a need for cong

furthermore it could not be ignored that the author of the patriot act, representative jim sensenbrenner has been quoted on saying on multiple occasions that congress would never have passed or twice reauthorized the patriot act had it known the full breadth of the nsa's snooping operation. the fact is, as usual, when you give the government an inch, they take a mile. we simply can't afford to play around with our most basic, fundamental human rights. back in may the 4 -- before the revelations of edward snowden came to light i introduced legislation to restore transparency, accountability and confidence to our national security apparatus. hr-1847, the electronic communications privacy act, is designed to increase protections for electronic communications, including personal e-mails, of u.s. citizens, and addresses the privacy concerns raised from the recent position that the irs took that the fourth amendment does not apply, and does not protect the privacy of personal, unopened e-mails because internet users do not have a reasonable expectations of privacy in such communications. clear

even jim sensenbrenner, i ranking republican on the committee of jurisdiction, who was the author, hasxpressed deep concerns and to worry about what has happened. he wants to revisit it. he wants to go back and figure out a way that we can better protect american citizens against this abuse of power. nonpartisan. -- if wee says this want a target on our backs, would this reduce the nsa spying? guest: i do not know. that is a separate question. the question of whether or not going into iraq or these foreign wars was a good idea. in hindsight, $1 trillion later and although i've lost, -- all of the lives lost, we should question whether this foreign venture them is worth the lives and the cost. fundamentally, is it good foreign policy? host: front page of the new york times -- look at this headline. spying by an ally and tangled a u.s. law form. the list of those caught up in the global net. headsocial media users to of state, now includes another entry. american lawyers. the government of indonesia had retained a law firm. he reports that the nsa's australian counterpart notify the agen