Florida is considering legislation that would establish a state-level intelligence operation modelled on the CIA, prompting concerns about unchecked domestic surveillance. House Bill 945, if passed, would create an office tasked with identifying and disrupting threats to the state and the United States, but critics warn it could lead to scrutiny based on individuals' 'views' or 'opinions'.
The proposal blurs the traditional line between state law enforcement and intelligence work, and experts fear it could become a blueprint for other red states. Red states often adopt policies from one another on issues from gerrymandering to abortion, and a state intelligence office empowered to monitor ideology could spread if normalised.
The bill runs counter to lessons from the September 11 attacks, which highlighted the dangers of fragmented intelligence systems. Congress created the National Counterterrorism Center to unify operations, but HB 945 risks recreating the very silos that federal reforms sought to eliminate. The federal government already spends enormous sums on national security, and duplicating these functions at state level could be both wasteful and dangerous.
More troubling is the potential for misuse. The bill's language allows targeting based on 'views' and 'opinions', echoing abuses like the FBI's Cointelpro programme in the 1960s and 70s, which infiltrated protest movements and targeted civil rights leaders for their beliefs. Public outrage led to oversight mechanisms, but even federal agencies have struggled with overreach, as shown by Edward Snowden's 2013 disclosures of widespread surveillance of Americans' communications.
Federal surveillance is subject to laws like the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, but those constraints may not apply to state-level operations. If federal agencies with expertise and oversight cannot avoid abuse, newly created state intelligence offices are unlikely to fare better. The political context in Florida heightens concerns, with officials already labelling advocacy groups as security threats and considering another bill, SB 1632, which would expand the definition of domestic terrorism to combat 'ideologies inconsistent with American principles'.
