From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:16:28 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key  Crypto Bill (fwd)
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970619215942.16667A-100000@well.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 19:17:35 -0400
From: Jonah Seiger <jseiger@cdt.org>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>, sameer <sameer@c2.net>
Cc: fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key  Crypto Bill

At 3:17 PM -0700 6/19/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:

>Yes, it would have been possible for any and all senators on the commerce
>committee to vote against *any and all* crypto bills that had key recovery
>provisions.

Um, ok. Can you explain your view?

Poly Sci 101: McCain is the chairman of the committee, and as a result
yields a lot of power over the agendas of all the committee members.  When
a member crosses the chairman,  he or she takes a risk of not getting
support for his or her priorities.  If the chairman doesn't support your
bill, it ain't gonna pass. Period.

Chairman, on the other hand, don't like to loose.  If they bring a bill to
a vote, it's because they know they can win either by passing the bill or
making a political statement. And the chairman holds all the cards in the
deck.

If a committee member disagrees with the chairman, and takes a risk by
voting that way, he or she needs to have something to be *for*.  Otherwise,
he or she is just going to appear to be a big pain in the ass. It's very
difficult in the real world to be *against* something but *for* nothing.

Like it or not , and no matter how much we yell and scream about it, most
members of Congress do not fully agree with your position and do not
support complete and total de-control of encryption. While a lot of them
support the SAFE approach (which I know you don't think goes far enough
either) - neither the Commerce Committee members, or anyone else for that
matter, are going to just stand up and say NO to their Chairman without
having anything to be *for*.

This process is raw and smelly, I know, but it's also called Democracy.

I am curious to hear your view on this.

But before we get all caught up in the old jihad between "the purists" and
the "pragmatists", just think about this for a moment:  If we are going to
have a prayer of getting out of this Congress without getting stuck with
manditory key recovery, we have to at least recognize where we fit in to
the overall equation and how the system actually works.  We can do a lot to
impact the outcome of this issue -- but not if we are operating in a
different area code from reality.

Jonah



  * Value Your Privacy? The Government Doesn't.  Say 'No' to Key Escrow! *
            Adopt Your Legislator -  http://www.crypto.com/adopt

--
Jonah Seiger, Communications Director                  (v) +1.202.637.9800
Center for Democracy and Technology                 pager: +1.202.859.2151
<jseiger@cdt.org>

http://www.cdt.org                                      PGP Key via finger
http://www.cdt.org/homes/jseiger/