To the maximum extent consistent with applicable law, agencies shall, in the design and use of information systems and in the dissemination of information among agencies:<\/STRONG><\/P>
(a) give the highest priority to (i) the detection, prevention, disruption, preemption, and mitigation of the effects of terrorist activities against the territory, people, and interests of the United States of America<\/STRONG>; (ii) the interchange of terrorism information among agencies; (iii) the interchange of terrorism information between agencies and appropriate authorities of State, local, and tribal governments, and between agencies and appropriate private sector entities; and (iv) the protection of the ability of agencies to acquire additional such information; <\/FONT><\/P><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
Beyond the privacy implications, what about the implications for federal IT?<\/DIV><\/DIV>But if you do use aggregate information for one purpose (preventing terrorism) how do you prevent that information being used in other ways? After all, we live in the era of the remix and mashup. Information wants to be free.<\/DIV><\/DIV>There are so many questions that need answering. Not least who will scrutinize the scrutinizers, given that the new legislation seemingly includes every major US government organization<\/DIV>Secretaries of State, the Treasury, Defense, Commerce, Energy, and Homeland Security; the Attorney General; the Director of National Intelligence; the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency; the Director of the Office of Management and Budget; the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center; and such other heads of departments or agencies as the Director of National Intelligence may designate.<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>except<\/STRONG><\/FONT> the Government Accountability Office.<\/STRONG><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/STRONG> <\/DIV>I am somewhat worried about the current administration’s alleged use of smear tactics to take out political opponents, in light of this new legislation. We all screw up from time to time-maybe we let our legal license slip because we forget to pay the bill, or we forget to declare a payment we should, or we did something naughty at university. That is called ammunition.<\/DIV><\/DIV>Can we not imagine a scenario where it is deemed that a democrat taking office would represent an opportunity for terrorists, and thus must be avoided in in the national interest? I am certain there are plenty of people in Washington who would take that position in a heartbeat. So would information about the candidate, which weakened her position, be terrorism information? Who decides?<\/DIV><\/DIV>Another concern would the fact so few government services are now actually provided by the public sector. Private companies only have a responsibility to shareholders, not to the American Public, or that of other nations. Private companies in the information-sharing chain create a structural weak link. <\/DIV>