I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise in support of the rule but also in support of the manager's amendment. I think the gentleman from Kentucky, the chairman of one of the two committees that you have referred to here, is absolutely right, that these funds are sequestered and cannot be used for any other purpose. The Appropriations Committee may not appropriate all of the funds at one time, but they can only hold those funds in trust for the Patent Office. And then the Patent Office as they identify needs that need to be worked on will come to the appropriators, will come to you and your committee, and get approval for them. That maintains congressional oversight of the Patent Office. This is supported by the Commissioner of the Patent Office.
Bob Goodlatte: “I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise in support of the rule but also in support of the manager's amendment. I…”
Share
More from Bob Goodlatte
Right, but the sale of the information to the government puts the government in the picture as well and the Fourth Amendment is directed at the government not obtaining information without showing probable cause, without providing a…
I think the PATRIOT Act went off track in not defining some of the areas that set parameters around government gathering data.
The fact of the matter is this Committee has jurisdiction over this narrower focus regarding protecting the Fourth Amendment.
The more opportunities that the consumer has to decide for themselves whether or not they want to make certain information available to Google or other companies and control how Google might utilize that information, the better.





