From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 07:57:00 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970620164114.11215C-100000@well.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 19:22:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Platt <cp@panix.com>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 3.08 - Senate Committee Approves Key Crypto Bill (fwd)

> From: Jonah Seiger <jseiger@cdt.org>

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

The United States is not a pure democracy, it is a constitutional
republic. I believe I have a constitutional right to privacy. I also
believe that I probably have a constitutional right to anonymity. It
doesn't matter what "most senators" think, or indeed what "most Americans"
think, if their thinking is contradicted by the Constitution. We do not
have simple majority rule, here. In fact the founders of the country went 
out of their way to insure that the simple majority could not easily 
violate the principles upon which the country was founded.

> 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.

This can be summarized as "compromise or else." I have never believed 
that this is an acceptable policy when dealing with people who are 
ethically impaired. Moreover, it is not even a SENSIBLE policy, from a 
purely pragmatic point of view. Did ACT-UP adopt a compromising position 
in order to get what they wanted? Would they have done better if they had 
agreed to compromise? Of course not. You have no hope of getting even a 
fraction of what you want, when dealing with the power-crazed yahoos in 
DC, unless you are willing either to bribe them or be an intransigent 
extremist. (So it seems to me, anyway.)

The CDT party line always seems to be, "play ball and kiss ass in the hope 
that legislators will be nice to you." Thanks, but no thanks.