The Christie vs. Paul Debate

[Commentary] Facebook and Twitter report that the most-discussed part of Aug 6’s Republican debate was a three-minute exchange on surveillance and national security. It sharply illuminated the topic -- and made clear how the US could have both security and privacy.

Gov Chris Christie (R-NJ) was asked this about Sen Rand Paul (R-KY): “You’ve said that Sen. Paul’s opposition to the NSA’s collection of phone records has made the US weaker and more vulnerable, even going so far as to say that he should be called before Congress to answer for it if we should be hit by another terrorist attack. Do you really believe you can assign blame to Sen. Paul just for opposing the bulk collection of people’s phone records in the event of a terrorist attack?” Gov Christie, who served as a federal prosecutor in the years after the 9/11 terror attacks, said yes, describing himself as the only candidate “who’s actually filed applications under the Patriot Act, who has gone before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, who has prosecuted and investigated and jailed terrorists.” Sen Paul responded: “I want to collect more records from terrorists, but less records from innocent Americans.” Gov Christie: “That’s a completely ridiculous answer: ‘I want to collect more records from terrorists, but less records from other people.’ How are you supposed to know?” This captures the core of the debate over the National Security Agency. Phone metadata refers to records of who called whom when, but not to the content of calls. Warrants can be issued to search for more details about the calls only if a court agrees there are reasons for suspicion.