1997-11-08 - Senator Ashcroft on Encryption

Header Data

From: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 33d179da7b33a020f3bbb96d1214c264aac26dc8bfbb4fac450ad42dbf427b75
Message ID: <1.5.4.32.19971108200131.00c02574@pop.pipeline.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-11-08 20:08:38 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 04:08:38 +0800

Raw message

From: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 04:08:38 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Senator Ashcroft on Encryption
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19971108200131.00c02574@pop.pipeline.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



[Congressional Record: November 7, 1997 (Senate)]
[Page S11959]
 
                         ENCRYPTION

  Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I wanted to take a moment to 
associate myself with the comments of the majority leader from 
October 21, 1997. Senator Lott has correctly highlighted the 
FBI's constantly shifting arguments and the Bureau's seemingly 
relentless attempts to grab more power at the expense of the 
Constitution, particularly the fourth amendment's protection 
of privacy and the fifth amendment's guarantee of due process.

  The FBI legislative proposal goes far beyond the Commerce 
Committee's misguided encryption legislation in further 
disregarding our Constitution. Instead of working with those who 
understand that S.909 gives the FBI unprecedented and troubling 
authority to invade lives, the FBI has attempted to grab even 
broader authority. The Senate would be foolish to pass S.909. 
In no way can we even consider the ill-advised FBI approach. 
The reach of the FBI has now extended so far that the President 
has taken the other side of the issue and supported a free 
market approach, according to his public comments delivered 
abroad.

  I can only conclude that the FBI has introduced its proposal 
as a ploy to make S.909 look like a reasonable compromise. The 
only other explanation for the FBI's proposal is that the Bureau 
will not be satisfied with S.909, but instead will continue to 
work to erode our Constitutional protections. In fact, the new 
proposal only draws attention to the many problems of the 
Commerce Committee language. Neither proposal is acceptable.

  The issue of encryption must be revisited in a real and serious 
way next year, both at the committee level and in the Senate 
chamber, to examine the many Constitutional implications of the 
various proposals. I look forward to working with the Majority 
Leader and other Senators who have expressed interest in 
encryption legislation.

  I yield the floor.

[End]

See Senator Lott's comments on encryption:

  http://jya.com/lott-crypto.htm






Thread