Press Releases

WASHINGTON, DC – Yesterday, during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing, Congresswoman Lori Trahan (MA-03) railed against the Trump administration’s plan to turn over Americans’ most personal information that was harvested by Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) staffers to Palantir so the company can build dossiers on every American.

“Under the Trump Administration, DOGE aggressively collected sensitive data across agencies, breaking down firewalls that are supposed to protect us. Then came the Executive Order directing agencies to ‘eliminate information silos’ – basically, to share and pool that data,” Congresswoman Trahan said. “And just last week, we learned that Palantir, a Silicon Valley company known for building surveillance tools, is being hired to build AI-powered profiles on every American using the data DOGE collected. It’s hard to overstate how dangerous this is.”

CLICK HERE or the image below to watch Trahan’s remarks. A transcript is embedded below.

 

Last week, the New York Times reported that the Trump administration has drastically increased federal contracting with Palantir, a Silicon Valley tech firm started by Peter Thiel who has donated heavily to Republican campaigns. Palantir has historically worked closely with the Pentagon and the intelligence community to provide big data analytics and AI products, and in recent years has expanded its customer base to include private companies, civilian agencies, and state and local governments. According to the Times report, the company is now being directed to use its AI systems to merge the personal data of Americans collected by different federal agencies into one database, essentially creating a profile on every person in the country.

During the hearing today, Trahan pointed out how this type of system could be weaponized by the government against Americans.

“Let me just give you an example – a hypothetical, of course, but not a far-fetched one. Sarah is a regular American. She pays her taxes, owns a gun legally, and is raising her daughter Emma on her own. She and Emma rely on Medicaid to get the care they need,” Congresswoman Trahan continued. “One day, Sarah shares a post on Facebook. She’s concerned about something the President said about firearms, and she posts so. But in Washington, an AI-powered monitoring system flags her post. A political appointee digs into her personal data and sends emails to agency heads urging them to take action against her.”

“Within days, Sarah’s life falls apart,” Congresswoman Trahan said. “The IRS audits her and claims she owes thousands. Emma’s doctor says her Medicaid isn’t active anymore, and now Sarah has to pay out of pocket. Now, to be clear, this story is made up. But it’s not science fiction. It’s an alarm. It’s a warning.”

In March, Trahan announced an effort to rewrite the Privacy Act of 1974, a 50-year-old law designed to protect Americans’ privacy that has not been meaningfully updated since its passage in the wake of the Watergate scandal. Dozens of organizations and individuals have responded to Trahan’s request for information about how to strengthen privacy protections while preserving the ability to modernize and improve the efficiency of government services.

“I’ve spent the past three months talking with civil liberties groups, privacy experts, and people across the country – and the one thing is clear: We need stronger privacy laws,” Congresswoman Trahan concluded. “I believe we can protect people’s data and modernize government to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. These goals are not at odds – they’re linked.”

-----------------------------------------

Congresswoman Lori Trahan

Remarks As Delivered

House Oversight and Government Reform Hearing: The Federal Government in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

June 5, 2025

 

Trahan: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you allowing me to be a part of this important conversation.

Over on the Energy and Commerce Committee, which is where I usually serve, we have a lot of conversations about technology, and one thing is always clear: data is at the heart of AI. That’s why I believe that any serious discussion about AI has to start with a conversation about privacy. And that’s what I’m here to do today – to sound the alarm about a deeply troubling trend: our own government’s growing appetite for Americans’ personal data.

Let me just give you an example – a hypothetical, of course, but not a far-fetched one.

Sarah is a regular American. She pays her taxes, owns a gun legally, and is raising her daughter Emma on her own. She and Emma rely on Medicaid to get the care they need.

One day, Sarah shares a post on Facebook. She’s concerned about something the President said about firearms, and she posts so. But in Washington, an AI-powered monitoring system flags her post. A political appointee digs into her personal data and sends emails to agency heads urging them to take action against her.

Within days, Sarah’s life falls apart. The IRS audits her and claims she owes thousands. Emma’s doctor says her Medicaid isn’t active anymore, and now Sarah has to pay out of pocket.

Now, to be clear, this story is made up. But it’s not science fiction. It’s an alarm. It’s a warning.

Mr. Schneier, you talked in your testimony about coercion as an “adversarial use” of data. What kinds of coercion could bad actors inside the government use if they had detailed profiles on every American?

 

Mr. Schneier: I would think of it as selective investigation. The government has enormous powers to investigate people, and the question is who they choose to investigate. There’s a famous book from many years ago called “Three Felonies a Day” – that we in our normal lives commit three felonies a day because there are just so many rules and we don’t know them.

So given things like that, who you choose to enforce the law on matters. So this data can be used to select people whom to investigate, people whom to charge. And this could be used selectively by any regime – even not the U.S. – any country that wants to do this.

Trahan: Unfortunately, this isn’t a hypothetical trend – it’s already happening.

Under the Trump Administration, DOGE aggressively collected sensitive data across agencies, breaking down firewalls that are supposed to protect us. Then came the Executive Order  directing agencies to “eliminate information silos” – basically, to share and pool that data. And just last week, we learned that Palantir, a Silicon Valley company known for building surveillance tools, is being hired to build AI-powered profiles on every American using the data DOGE collected.

It’s hard to overstate how dangerous this is.

Mr. Schneier, are you worried that once this data is centralized, future administrations – no matter their party – could weaponize it? I mean, are we on the verge of opening Pandora’s box?

Mr. Schneier: I don’t know if Pandora’s Box has been open years ago, but certainly giving this power to a government is something that feels very un-American. There are reasons why this data was siloed. There are reasons why we didn’t have these powers.

I mean you can imagine humans doing this well before AI, but we chose not to. So AI can certainly make this more efficient, but yes this is power in the hands of a human who wants to wield it for ill can do that very efficiently.

Trahan: We need a national reckoning on privacy. That means strong oversight of this Administration and its tech partners, and real legislation to protect Americans' rights.

You know, I’ve spent the past three months talking with civil liberties groups, privacy experts, and people across the country – and the one thing is clear: We need stronger privacy laws.

I believe we can protect people’s data and modernize government to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. These goals are not at odds – they’re linked.

So if you’re listening and you’re concerned about what’s happening – about Big Tech, about government overreach, about your family’s privacy – call my office. Let’s have a national conversation. Let’s protect the freedom our founders fought for and the privacy we all deserve.

And one last thing I just wanted to mention because over the course of this hearing, the Chair has suggested that no one on the other side of the aisle called attention to the harms of the Republicans’ ten-year ban on state AI regulations. That’s patently false.

We had robust debate on the Energy and Commerce Committee with several Democratic members, myself included, calling attention to this provision during and after our 26-hour markup. In fact, Democrats offered an amendment to strike the language entirely. So Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the results of the recorded vote.

Chairman: Without objection.

Trahan: Thank you. I yield back.

###