Legally, Dodd's bill should be completely redundant as all the information it uncovers should all have been reported to the government on your tax form by you. There is the difference. FISA tries to get and forgives those who helped get new information by questionable and quite possibly illegal means. Dodd’s bill is a check to make sure you are reporting to the government the information you are legally required to report.

I find it more nanny state than big brother. Both evil but different.

Oh, I think it probably would.. :D

I realize that my positions may be contradictory, but when you look at things closely, it really isn't..

As I have taken great pains to point out, I CONCEDE the possibility that Dodd may have real and legitimate reasons for his measure that decimates the financial privacy of all Americans. And, as I pointed out, this hits a lot closer to home than other measures... But, as you see on HuffPo and in here, those who castigate the new FISA measures are not willing to concede the same point. To whit that maybe there ARE legitimate reasons for these measures..

Therein lies my beef..

I don't like Dodd's bill... But I don't know enough about the circumstances to state unequivocally that they are WRONG.. I have to bow to his better judgment and at least concede the POSSIBILITY that he may be correct...

It's intellectually dishonest for those that oppose the FISA measures to NOT concede the same.. That maybe, JUST MAYBE, these measures are necessary...

Finally, my biggest beef is that Dodd is being heralded as some Privacy Hero.. When, in fact, he is not...

I would LOVE to hear Dodd explain his position on the FISA measures vis a vis his sponsoring the bill that totally decimates the financial privacy of all Americans..

Think we'll ever see that!??

I have a feeling, judging from the supportive comments I have read on HuffPo (yes, there are quite a few) that most Americans don't really have a problem with the new FISA measures.. The big beef is the Telecom Immunity/Pardon/Forgiveness aspect of things..

People are bitter because they won't be able to cling to that shiny new baseball bat that they wanted to beat Bush over the head with..

Oh well, I say.. K sara sara...

Michale.....

Maybe I'm confused, but I can't help but wonder if you're on both sides of an issue at once here. How is data privacy OK in one instance (bank records) but not in the other (phone calls/email wiretaps)?

Personally, I'm against both, just for the record. Call me a "Data Privaterian" if you will, I don't mind.

Would it help if Dodd's bill said "we're targeting terrorists with this program"?

-CW

Michale : 247 purchases from Amazon for a total of $7,687

OH MY GOD, HOW DO YOU KNOW!!!!?????? :D

I don't like it but it's all about cracking down on taxes and is too little data to be useful for most intelligence gathering efforts, though I could see that bulk data being of occasional use.

But that's just my point.. The argument against the Bush Administration is a similiar argument. I could argue that the data collected on Aunt Martha's Brownie Recipe is "too little data to be useful for most intelligence gathering efforts"

But that doesn't seem to matter to the hordes that are against the FISA measures. Their claim is ANY DATA collected is too much data collected..

Don't get me wrong, BB... While I may not agree with your with regards to the Dodd measure (and I have a stake in it, being I do a lot of online stuff to supplement my income) my point is that it is hypocritical of Dodd to author this bill yet decry the FISA measures.

But, as I said, I have to concede that there MAY be legitimate reasons for this. Most likely there is, as you have outlined...

I am just saying....

Michale.....

I don't like it but it's all about cracking down on taxes and is too little data to be useful for most intelligence gathering efforts, though I could see that bulk data being of occasional use.

Michale : 247 purchases from Amazon for a total of $7,687

The raw data of each individual sale stays on the Amazon servers.

At least that's my reading of the summary.

That sounds like the Bush Administration and their claim that only terrorism related info will be viewed...

Dodd get's ALL the information and then chooses what he needs from it?

How is this different than the eavesdropping that the Bush Administration does???

Michale.....

The summary text of this particular part of the bill:

Payment Card and Third Party Network Information Reporting. The proposal requires information reporting on payment card and third party network transactions. Payment settlement entities, including merchant acquiring banks and third party settlement organizations, or third party payment facilitators acting on their behalf, will be required to report the annual gross amount of reportable transactions to the IRS and to the participating payee. Reportable transactions include any payment card transaction and any third party network transaction. Participating payees include persons who accept a payment card as payment and third party networks who accept payment from a third party settlement organization in settlement of transactions. A payment card means any card issued pursuant to an agreement or arrangement which provides for standards and mechanisms for settling the transactions. Use of an account number or other indicia associated with a payment card will be treated in the same manner as a payment card. A de minimis exception for transactions of $10,000 or less and 200 transactions or less applies to payments by third party settlement organizations. The proposal applies to returns for calendar years beginning after December 31, 2010. Back-up withholding provisions apply to amounts paid after December 31, 2011. This proposal is estimated to raise $9.802 billion over ten years.

I don’t particularly agree with it but to a certain extent I think it is probably inevitable. This is about taxes not tracking information. The information goes to the IRS and in annual GROSS amounts per individual third party that amount to a total greater than $10,000 or 200 transactions. This is not item by item list of all your on-line/credit card purchases.

Have any of you READ his latest bill??? The one that requires all credit card companies, including Ebay/PayPal, Amazon, Google Checkout, etc etc to send all their transaction data to the Federal Government??

I mean, hay.. He might have a logical and rational reason for promoting such an idea... I don't presume to know what is in his mind. He has more information about things than I do. So what he is proposing MAY be the right thing to do.

But to hail him as a hero of privacy??? What?? Seriously!???

Michale.....

{crossposted to http://www.huffingtonpost.com}