This article was originally published by Alexander Oakes at The Mises Institute.
American politicians love to tell the citizenry exactly what they are going to do for them. They claim they will install programs for the poor, increase domestic security, strengthen our international image, and fight tirelessly for their constituencies’ rights. But are these even things people want from their elected leaders?
Democrats and Republicans are typically somewhat on the fence about this question in that they like government intervention and force so long as they are used to further their partisan political ambitions. When it comes to libertarian voters, on the other hand, the answer is likely no. Rather, what most libertarians want is the one thing that a politician will never promise: that they will do absolutely nothing and leave everyone alone!
Even if libertarians are technically in the statistical minority, they have noticed a worrying trend and are using the amplifying power of social media to make it a national debate. More specifically, the internet has now made it almost impossible for the enemies of liberty to hide, and this has led to a growing Massie/Paul-led public referendum against our politicians’ unsavory relationship with warrantless spying. Ideally, this referendum will transcend libertarian circles and will grow so large that it infiltrates the ranks of the Democrats and, more importantly, the Republicans.
To give some context, The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA), which is generally associated with the global War on Terror, was actually around decades before 9/11, even though very few people knew about it. This ambiguity existed, in part, because communications technology before the internet was not nearly as sophisticated or intrusive as it is now. However, after this act became supercharged with the adoption of the Patriot Act in 2001 and then the addition of Section 702 in 2008, its days in the dark were over, and unfortunately, so were our days of assumed privacy.
Even though the internet is waking up to the heinous unconstitutionality of these pieces of legislation, the politicians, on the other hand, don’t seem to be listening, a problem that, ironically, is more prevalent among the self-proclaimed “freedom-loving” MAGA Republicans than it is among the “uni party deep-state” Democrats.
Case in point, in April of this year, a bill to restrict some of the privileges Section 702 gives intelligence agencies was deadlocked in the Republican-led house with massive Democrat opposition. This didn’t last long, though, because, after a closed-door meeting with the ever-trustworthy intelligence agencies, Representative Mike Johnson—who was and currently is the MAGA-endorsed Speaker of the House—cast the tie-breaking vote and ushered in another two years of indiscriminate government spying.
Flash forward to this week and you see some eerily similar patterns. For instance, long time opposer of the FISA Act and current MAGA nominee for the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, had a “closed-door meeting,” very similar to Johnson’s, and came away suddenly convinced that FISA was/is a great and necessary piece of legislation. And she wasn’t the only one.
Pam Bondi—MAGA’s pick for Attorney General following Matt Gaetz’s decision to remove himself from consideration (and Gaetz is another MAGA supporter of FISA reauthorization)—went in front of Congress this week for confirmation. When asked by well-known war hawk Lindsey Graham about FISA Section 702, her words were not that it was an atrocious, unconstitutional document that should be immediately tossed out, but rather that it is “extremely important.”
And last, but not least, Representative Elise Stefanik—who was floated as Trump’s VP not too long ago before becoming MAGA’s pick for UN Ambassador—is also aboard the FISA train and has voted for it every chance she’s had. That, plus severe increases in gun restrictions that take the form of red flag laws and her abysmal 48 percent liberty rating.
The moral of the story is that, yes, there are plenty of Democrats that support warrantless spying, but they are not the ones taking the reins of power for the next two to four years. This is to say that, for the immediate future, Republicans, and more specifically, MAGA, will be calling the shots.
What this means for liberty as a whole is still “to be determined.” Though, to be honest, from a libertarian perspective, it looks grim. Instead of cutting the government and expanding freedoms, the new administration is discussing unprecedented territorial expansion, creating new government agencies like the External Revenue Service, and, as stated above, remaining fervently dedicated at the decision-making level to the destruction of our constitutional expectation of privacy through the use of warrantless spying. When you throw in the recent flip-flopping on HB1 policy, along with an administration that is patently unfriendly to the Second Amendment, let’s just say it leaves a lot to be desired from even the most vanilla of libertarians.
Regardless of what the next four years hold, libertarians can take solace in knowing that this is nothing new. Every four years, we are made promises by the two major parties, and every four years, they are let down, but we get through it. What is important is that we keep fighting and keep working with the tools we have (social media, local politics, grassroots community outreach, etc.) to keep the authoritarian wolves at bay. Progress is being made, and the fact that this issue is even being discussed publicly on a national scale by senators and representatives is evidence of this. So, keep fighting and keep that sticky note on your laptop for at least a little longer anyway.
