John Kasich Quotes

On the question of information security, he claims that, in a Trump Administration, the U.S. government will not spy on its own citizens. If true, this would represent a turn away from the strong language that he has used about identifying terrorists on our soil.

The stakes in the encryption debate are high, with significant consequences for personal privacy, the U.S. private sector, and our national security.

I worked with people like Edward Snowden. Well, not people who took stuff home.

The political solutions proposed against encryption are not going to work against terrorism.

We see it in attempts on Capitol Hill to impose gag rules on rules on doctors on what they can say to their patients about family planning. And we certainly see it now with an effort by the government to tap our phones; invade our medical records, credit information, library records and the most sensitive personal information in the name of national security.

Clearly we must do everything we can to protect our country from the serious potential of another terrorist attack, but we can and must do so in a way that also protects the constitutional rights of the American people and maintains our free society. We can do that without living in an Orwellian world where the government and private corporations know every telephone call that we make, every website we visit, everyplace we go.

We have to be very careful, we have to be very vigilant but to think that Apple won't allow us to get into her cell phone - who do they think they are? Now we have to open it up.

The solution to government surveillance is to encrypt everything.

We understand the concerns that people have with not only protecting our values, but our privacy interests as well. We think that the USA Freedom Act was a good resolution of that.

One of the things we're going to have to discuss and debate is how are we striking this balance between the need to keep the American people safe and our concerns about privacy. Because there are some trade-offs involved. I welcome this debate, and I think it's healthy for our democracy.

You have to fight for your privacy or you lose it.

In the Internet age, it is inevitable that corporations and government agencies will have access to detailed information about people's lives.

I really believe that we don't have to make a trade-off between security and privacy. I think technology gives us the ability to have both.

It's increasingly clear that governments, major corporations, banks, universities and other such bodies view the defense of their secrets as a desperate matter of institutional survival, so much so that the state has gone to extraordinary lengths to punish and/or threaten to punish anyone who so much as tiptoes across the informational line.

You can't come forward against the world's most powerful intelligence agencies and be completely free from risk.

I support safeguarding users' personally identifiable information and sensitive data like health or financial records. I also believe the government has a responsibility to punish deceptive and unfair practices that defy reasonable expectations about consumers' privacy.

There is no reliable way to calculate from the number of recorded compliance issues how many Americans have had their communications improperly collected, stored or distributed by the NSA.

I want my government to do something about my privacy - I don't want to just do it on my own.

Snowden was extremely good at digital self-defense. When he was employed by the C.I.A. and N.S.A., one of his jobs was to teach U.S. national security officials and C.I.A. employees how to protect their data in high-threat digital environments.

It is difficult, if not impossible, to argue that laws written in the 1970s are adequate for today's intelligence challenges.

We should be adult enough to understand that major countries are going to be spying on us.

Now all of us can talk to the NSA — just by dialing any number.

We don’t have to choose between preserving privacy and preventing terrorism. We do have to decide how much oversight and accountability there should be when the government conducts surveillance on its citizens.

Our agency (the Central Intelligence Agency) is the last refuge of organizational privacy available to the U. S. Government.

In our view, the current storage by the government of bulk meta-data creates potential risks to public trust, personal privacy, and civil liberty.