The FBI is in the process of trying to get CALEA (the bill that requires telecommunications companies to provide means for wiretapping) expanded to include online communications including things social networking websites, email, instant messaging and VoIP. The problem (for the FBI) is that the software developers and servers for those things aren't necessarily based in the U.S. or subject to U.S. law.
Unlike with telecommunications providers which are geographically tied to their customers, if internet users in the U.S. want privacy and security (and if this amendment passes), we can just chose software and services based in countries that don't have such requirements. If you're concerned about using Skype, use something like Jitsi, which is open-source and uses end-to-end encryption. For email, you don't even have to change providers or clients, since you can just use GPG or some other implementation of OpenPGP to encrypt the message. (Sure, the recipient has to have a public key, but creating a key and registering it with a keyserver takes less than a minute. You can find a link to my public key on my profile page.) For social networks, blogs, discussion boards, and other means of posting content online, we'll soon have Privly, which will let us post anything anywhere, privately and securely. And if you're really
concerned about your privacy, there's always Tor.Basically, any attempt by the government to spy on our online communication is already dead in the water.
They'll only be able to spy on people who either don't care about the privacy and security of their communications or don't have the minimal tech skills to make their communications private and secure. Personally, I think this is a good thing. There are plenty of perfectly moral and ethical reasons for wanting your communications to be private and secure, even (or sometimes especially) from the government. Sure, criminals can use these tools as well, but that's always been and always will be true. Outlawing encryption won't stop outlaws from using encryption. And requiring software and services to provide police with backdoors will only cause criminals to use other software and services without them.
Does the existence these technologies mean the criminals win? Of course not. It just means that the police will have to use the tools that have served them best throughout history: the criminals themselves. The easiest way to get someone's password isn't to spend hours using sophisticated software to crack into their computer; but rather to use social engineering, i.e. to get them to give it to you themselves. The same goes for investigating crimes. Why spend the time and effort to try to intercept criminal's communications when you can get one of the criminals to tell you what was said? It's a time-honored tradition for police to use little fish to catch big fish. Technology hasn't changed that. And these same technologies can and do aid the police themselves. Tor, for example, is used by undercover cops and informants to protect their identities.
I think the world would be a much better place if people would just embrace technological progress and adapt to it rather than trying to force it to fit their outdated world views.