Last week, the House of Representatives came within eight votes of defunding the NSA program that collects telephone metadata. The vote was no flash in the pan; developments over the last few days suggest it could be the harbinger of a major change in how the US deals with surveillance.

Wednesday's vote was unusual, especially in today's highly partisan House, with defunding support from both sides of the aisle. The co-sponsors of the bill to defund the NSA were two Michigan Congressmen with very different backgrounds: 33-year-old Republican Tea Party favorite Justin Amash and John Conyers, an 84-year-old Democrat from Detroit first elected to Congress in 1964. Amash and Conyers' amendment to a defense spending bill would have prevented any NSA "bulk surveillance" program from being funded.

Opponents of the amendment included establishment figures from both parties. Current House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) joined former speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to support the bill.

Reports put Pelosi, in particular, at the heart of a concerted effort to push for "no" votes among Democrats. Democrats in swing districts or more conservative districts tended to support the NSA funding. "Pelosi had a big effect on more middle-of-the-road hawkish Democrats who didn't want to be identified with a bunch of lefties," an unnamed Democratic committee aide told Foreign Policy. David Kravetz at Wired noted that, on average, the "no" voters who supported the NSA received considerably more cash from defense firms.

Among those who voted no, “lingering questions”

Nearly a week later, the vote is still resonating. The "defund the NSA" amendment was opposed by 83 Democrats, but most of them have indicated they have serious reservations about the current state of surveillance programs and expect them to be addressed.

On Friday, Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi put those concerns in writing in a letter to President Obama that was also signed by 153 Democratic members of Congress. The letter signers included 61 of the 83 Democrats who voted against the amendment last week. It reads:

Although some of us voted for and others against the amendment, we all agree that there are lingering questions and concerns about the current 215 collection program. These include: Whether the bulk metadata telecommunications collection program sufficiently protects the privacy and civil liberties of Americans.

Whether the program could be tailored more narrowly to better ensure the protection of privacy and civil liberties.

Whether the law is being implemented in a manner consistent with Congressional intent.

How we can ensure greater transparency regarding FISA court operations, decision-making, and issuance of orders.

Whether changes to the current FISA Court structure are needed.

More votes for reforms to NSA programs are surely on the way once Congress returns from its August recess.

Late Monday, Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA) of Palo Alto told KQED News that she's working on a bill that would give tech companies permission to publish the more detailed transparency reports they've been looking for while cutting back on the NSA's authority. "Only those named as targets of a federal terrorism investigation" would be subject to phone wiretapping, Eshoo said. She said that Snowden's leaks may have harmed the US by leaking classified information to China and Russia. At the same time, "it brought this out like nothing else could have, because this was classified, but it went public, and the American people got to see how this operates.

Another Bay Area Democrat, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, is working on a bill together with Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), one of the original authors of the Patriot Act. "There is a growing sense that things have really gone a-kilter here," she said. Lawmakers have been assured multiple times that "indiscriminate collection of data did not exist" for American citizens, she told the New York Times. Now members of Congress are coping with "a grave sense of betrayal."

Politicians from both parties are looking to rein in what they see as an out-of-control surveillance regime, and that's resonating with leaders on Congress' Intelligence Committees. Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), the Vice Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has been one of the staunchest defenders of the NSA since the leaks began nearly two months ago; in recent days he's struck a more conciliatory tone. "We're talking through it right now," he told the Times yesterday. "There are a lot of ideas on the table, and it's pretty obvious that we've got some uneasy folks."

Down at the barber shop, talking about the FISA court

The Congressional action comes as evidence of a major shift in public opinion grows. Data out from a new Pew Research poll shows that 50 percent of the public approves of the government's collection of phone and internet data, while 44 percent disapprove. Those numbers are little changed from a month ago, when 48 percent approved and 47 percent disapproved.

However, when asked about whether the programs may be going too far in restricting civil liberties, responses differed sharply from three years ago. In 2010, 32 percent of Americans said anti-terrorism programs had "gone too far in restricting civil liberties." This month, 47 percent believed that.

Sizeable shifts occurred across party groups. Tea Party Republicans went from strongly believing anti-terror programs didn't go far enough in 2010, to believing they are going too far in 2013. Liberal Democrats, perhaps counterintuitively, more or less followed that same path. The only group that didn't show big changes in concern for civil liberties are those who identify as "moderate/conservative Democrats."

The apparently changing public views on the issue were celebrated in a Monday column by Glenn Greenwald, the Guardian reporter who worked with Edward Snowden and first published the leaks. "[T]he only ones defending the NSA at this point are the party loyalists and institutional authoritarians in both parties," wrote Greenwald. "That's enough for the moment to control Washington outcomes—as epitomized by the unholy trinity that saved the NSA in the House last week: Pelosi, John Boehner, and the Obama White House—but it is clearly not enough to stem the rapidly changing tide of public opinion."

Such harsh words aren't getting Greenwald disparaged; quite the opposite. Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) has invited Greenwald to speak on a panel of critics of the NSA who will testify before an ad hoc committee in the House on Wednesday.

At the same time, NSA director General Keith Alexander and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper will be testifying in the Senate. "The simultaneous timing of the hearings will lead to a notable juxtaposition between opponents and defenders of the government's surveillance activities," notes The Guardian.

Minds are changing; concern about surveillance programs is starting to bubble up at the street level. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) said in an interview with Ars last week that pressure over the programs is starting to bubble up at street level.

"I never conceived of the day when people would come up to me at the barber shop and ask me about the FISA court," said Wyden. "In senior citizen centers and company lunchrooms, citizens are coming up to their legislators and saying, 'Hey, what's the deal with all this business about collecting my phone records? I didn't do anything wrong.' And that has given us a huge, huge wave of momentum."

Our full interview with Wyden, who has been publicly critical of the NSA since 2011, will be published later this week.