Free Congress Foundation / Coalition on Constitutional Liberties
Senators John Sununu (R-NH) and Russell Feingold (D-WI) passed an amendment last week to the bill authorizing DHS Appropriations. The Amendment calls upon DHS to report on how it uses data mining technology to engage in predictive assessments and profiling of criminal or terrorist activity. This kind of modeling [Minority Report-style] invites the possibility that citizens will be placed under suspicion, not because there are hard and fast facts linking them to crimes, but just because they fit the profile. Unrestrained use of data mining to identify potential suspects, based on profiling, would, over time, weaken the traditional evidentiary standards needed to launch investigations.
The Sununu-Feingold amendment is an important first step that would require one powerful federal agency to reveal how it is using data mining. The DHS Appropriations bill that includes this amendment now heads to conference between members of the Senate and House, probably coming from the appropriations, homeland security or governmental affairs committees. One member who will probably be involved in the negotiations is Senator Judd Gregg, who chairs the Homeland Security subcommittee of Appropriations.
Similar legislation is needed at the state level. A number of states were interested in participating in the MATRIX system, sponsored by the Department of Justice and DHS. MATRIX may be dead, but its spirit (or software) lives on in the states. Associated Press reporter David Royse wrote: “…a few states are pressing on with a similar system, continuing to look for ways to quickly search through a trove of data – from driver’s license photos to phone numbers to information about people’s cars. Their argument in seeking to keep the Matrix database alive in some form: It’s too important for solving crimes to give up on.” Is it possible that some smart analyst at a state police headquarters somewhere will get the idea to start modeling predictive behavior, then start checking files, adding commercial data to the mix, on their Matrixlike system to identify those who match the predictive profiles, then keep tabs on what they are doing?
Why wait to find out? Get your state legislature to pass its own version of the Sununu-Feingold provision.
A summary of the Amendment follows:
The Feingold-Sununu data mining amendment would require components of the Department of Homeland Security to report on their development and use of data-mining technologies to find predictive patterns of criminal or terrorist activity. This technology is capable of reviewing and analyzing millions of both public and private records on each and every American. The use of this technology by DHS to search for patterns of criminal or terrorist activity in vast quantities of digital data raises privacy and civil liberties issues, as well as questions about the effectiveness of these types of searches. The amendment would not apply to technology used to search information available to the general public via the Internet or available by any other means without the payment of a fee. In addition, the amendment would not apply to technology used to obtain information on a specific individual based on personal identifiers like a name or date of birth for the search. The amendment would not end funding for any program, determine the rules for use of data-mining technology, or threaten any ongoing investigation that uses data-mining technology. It would simply require reports that Congress can use to evaluate the efficacy and appropriateness of data-mining programs at DHS, and whether additional privacy or civil liberties safeguards are needed. If necessary, information in these reports could be classified.
Also, see: 7/17/05 Article By Associated Press Reporter David Royse On
“States Pushing For Use Of Database Of Public Info” [Posted On The Houston Chronicle Webpage]
Editor’s Note: Note that Florida, Ohio, Connecticut and Pennsylvania are using the MATRIX software. Royse notes that they just can’t link up to other states…”at least for now.”
…a few states are pressing on with a similar system, continuing to look for ways to quickly search through a trove of data — from driver's license photos to phone numbers to information about people's cars.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA
