I spent two years working at the NSA and while there a coworker (from GCHQ) noted that U.K.'s GCHQ can, by U.K. law, perform surveillance on U.S. citizens without a warrant and the U.K. shares that intelligence with the U.S., the English speaking countries have a cozy intelligence sharing agreement, sometimes called "five eyes." Pretty big loophole in the privacy laws. Realistically, even if a warrant is required the NSA has plenty of friendly judges willing to sign warrants when asked, it is not that strong an oversight. Also, large multinational corporations (DOW, coca-cola) have substantial influence over the U.S. government so when multinationals fund surveillance of U.S. citizens it is as if the federal gov is doing the surveillance.

Sometimes there just ain't enough work to keep all the bees busy and out of trouble, so might as well create another layer of bureaucracy, it's either that or build more prisons, the U.S. has the highest incarceration rate per capita in the world. Also, wonder if they have any serious mole problems in the intelligence agencies, for instance Israel has a good deal of interest in what the U.S. military does, getting more data on employees might help with mole problems, not just whistle-blowers. Definitely would be better if there was much less secrecy in the U.S. gov in general, help with fraud.

What does this say about the hypocrisy of the Thomas Drake prosecution, a guy just trying to point out some of the mismanagement in DOD IT that he was privy to? http://natsecurityeb.blogspot.com/2010/10/thomas-drake.html or what former CIO Kundra said about an IT cartel controlling U.S. gov IT. http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9218466/Outgoing_federal_CIO_warns_of_an_IT_cartel_?taxonomyId=13&pageNumber=1

those regulations accumulated often as a result of the actions of lobbyists, those rules funnel money in the direction of the contractor. The regulations you site for the burger would have been written by the contract that wanted to supply the $200 burger and who has the lobbying power and inside friends to make it happen. You make the false assumption that the rules were written in good faith, they were not.

You sure the contractors lobbyist makes sure "the government" wants the double cheese burger in a way no one else wants it? "the government" ends up meaning some high level government employee who wants to cash in on the revolving door to the contractor. In the end watch where then money flows cause that is who is fucking shit up.