From: geeman@best.com
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 15:58:59 +0800
To: hua@chromatic.com>
Subject: Re: Clinton's threat of line-item veto affect crypto bill?
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970807082355.00708b40@best.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Read my earlier post re: this.  Clinton already said he'd veto SAFE.

At 10:00 AM 8/5/97 -0700, stewarts@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
>At 04:36 PM 8/4/97 -0700, Ernest Hua wrote:
>>Does anyone have any idea whether Clinton's threat of using the
>>line-item veto against portions of the big spending bill could
>>be leverage against some pro-SAFE legislators?
>
>The line item veto doesn't eliminate the political games in the budget,
>it just changes the details a bit.  Sure, he could threaten to
>veto their favorite pork-barrel projects for crossing him on crypto,
>just as he could threaten to veto them if they don't support
>his favorite pork.  But as someone else said, he can threaten to
>veto the crypto bill itself, or (perhaps worse) threaten to veto it
>unless it's "balanced", by including controls on domestic cryptography
>in return for letting Big Business export more products.
>
>
>#			Thanks;  Bill
># Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts@ix.netcom.com
># You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
>#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)
>
>
>