From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 14:49:22 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Burns bill?
Message-ID: <m0uEn9H-00091VC@pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


It has been over a month since we first heard that Burns was going to 
introduce a bill to free up encryption software exports.  It isn't here, 
yet, as you may have noticed.  However, I don't think that's the real 
problem.  The real problem is that we have seen essentially no information 
on it, and we (by we, I mean the entire Internet community) have not had an 
opportunity to study it and comment BEFORE it is introduced in Congress.

See, the usual practice of introducing it in Congress first and only then 
letting the public see the bill is, by my way of thinking, an example of 
extreme rudeness on the part of the politicians.  Bills are far easier to 
change before they've been officially filed, which I suppose is the point.  
We're not getting the opportunity to fix minor mistakes, or at least make 
Burns (or any other supporter) aware of them.  This is a glaring "take it or 
leave it" philosophy, one that we should reject.  Does he really intend to 
insult us? 

I see no reason to believe that Burns should be able to produce an adequate 
bill with the assistance of only industry lobbyists, but not the help of 
other citizens of varying degrees of expertise.  Burns should immediately 
release the text of the bill developed up until now, and then wait at least 
a few weeks before introducing it formally, after changes are proposed, 
considered, and accepted.

Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com


Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com