From: Peter Swire <swire.1@osu.edu>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 22:39:08 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re:unSAFE won't pass
Message-ID: <199709151418.KAA08991@mail4.uts.ohio-state.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



At 10:31 PM 9/14/97 -0400, Will Rodger explained his view that:

>>It may make for good copy, but I think it's just fantasy to think 
>the
>>>administration or their opponents, for that matter, will get what
>>>they want this year. Let them swarm. Who cares.
>>>
>>>At earliest, August of 1998 before anything passes - and even that 
>is
>>>highly optimistic.

        In politics, unfortunately, you often have to act *as if* the other
side is going to win soon.  If you don't, they might.

        A great example was the 1986 Tax Reform Act.  Everyone knew that it
was too complicated for Congress to understand.  Everyone knew that there
were lots of powerful opponents to its elimination of many tax loopholes.
But the darn thing passed anyways.  Even supporters were shocked.  The story
is told in a very well-written book, "Showdown in Gucci Gulch."

        When considering what Congress will do, remember that there are
12,000 bills a year introduced in each chamber.  Crypto is only one of many,
many issues the Members of Congress need to consider.  When things get too
complicated, a politician might think it's just easier to go along with law
enforcement.  How many politicians lose by being tough on crime?

        As for the 1996 Telecomm Act, it's a bad example of what's likely to
happen with crypto.  That Act was fought between truly enormous companies --
RBOCS, AT&T, cable, etc.  Those companies had enormous Washington offices
fighting a life and death lobbying battle for years.  In crypto, the good
guys have nothing like the same lobbying resources.  Unlike Telecomm, the
very largest existing companies in the country will not lose billions next
year if a bad crypto bill is passed.

        In short, it is quite possible that nothing will pass before August,
1998.  It is quite possible by then that the issue will seem politically
hot, and thus be dropped so close to an election.  But the FBI position
might win if we don't act *as if* mandatory key escrow is a real possibility.

        Peter

Prof. Peter Swire
Ohio State University
College of Law
mailto:swire.1@osu.edu
http://www.osu.edu/units/law/swire.htm (revised site now
	includes publications and Internet Privacy Page)