KKK derails crypto bill, report from House Judiciary...

The Net's crypto wet-dreams were demolished this afternoon by a
Congressional committee's fear of coffee-drenched kids and the Ku
Klux Klan.

A two-hour debate over whether KKK volunteers could be sued for
spilling coffee on an 8-year old at a bake sale blew through
millions of dollars in billable lobbyist-hours and prevented the
House Judiciary Committee from voting on Rep. Bob Goodlatte's
(R-VA) SAFE crypto bill today.

Somnolent yet somehow alert, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich) wasted an
hour sparring with the avuncular Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Illinois) over
the "Volunteer Protection Act," which insulates people volunteering
for nonprofit organizations from civil liability.

But would that apply to the KKK, wondered Conyers? Is the KKK a
registered 501(c)(3) organization under the IRS code? What about
501(c)(4) organizations? What if a KKK member decided to build houses
for Habitat for Humanity?

I kid you not: these are the questions that the august House
Judiciary committee grapples with. The members ran out of time
and never got around to voting on SAFE.

It was a bizzare meeting, to be sure, but at least one point made
sense: these decisions should be left to the states, not imposed on
them by the Feds. Some Congressmen even cited the landmark Supreme
Court decision in _Lopez_, which shortened the reach of the Federal
government. Conyers: "Someone has to explain why this is a federal
issue." Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY): "I don't see why it's necessary
for the federal government to invade."

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) coughed up an odd position: he likes the
bill, but wants to make sure his GOP colleagues appreciate that
this bill would screw the states. (It uses the Constitution's
"interstate commerce clause" to justify the Feds interfering.)
Frank said: "The notion that the coach of the Little League is
involved in interstate commerce -- unless the third baseline is in
another state -- strikes me as a hard sell. A dispute involving the
coach in a little league will now be federalized... I don't have a
problem with that... I do insist, however, that those in the past
who have invoked [states' rights understand that] this is an
obliteration of Lopez."

Those were the high points of the debate, and it went downhill from
there. Frank claimed that the Civil War meant that states have no
rights. Someone rambled about girl scouts in South Carolina.
Someone else spoke passionately about "standards of tortious
behavior." Then there was talk about tricyles and hammers.

By this time, the audience was falling asleep. I counted 10 people
nodding off before I ran out of fingers.

A frustrated Hyde tried to broker a deal: "If your staff person can
work with your staff person, can you draft replacement language?"
Conyers replied. "We're trying to help chairman Hyde. We've got 12
minutes [left]. There's no way in the world we're going to allow
hate group hangers-on to be exempted from simple negligence."

It worked. By 5:15 pm, after a dozen amendments, the committee
passed the "Volunteer Protection Act." As for SAFE -- well, if
you're a Congressman faced with the choice of bashing the KKK or
tackling crypto policy, what would you do?

-By Declan McCullagh (declan@well.com) and Will Rodger
(rodger@worldnet.att.net), who refuses to wear a tie to these
events any more.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----


In <v03007804af9ea94e831c@[168.161.105.191]>, on 05/13/97 at 05:32 PM,
   Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> said:


>The Net's crypto wet-dreams were demolished this afternoon by a
>Congressional committee's fear of coffee-drenched kids and the Ku Klux
>Klan.

[Discription of a typical day in congress sniped]


>It worked. By 5:15 pm, after a dozen amendments, the committee passed the
>"Volunteer Protection Act." As for SAFE -- well, if you're a Congressman
>faced with the choice of bashing the KKK or tackling crypto policy, what
>would you do?

I personaly think that this is a good thing. :)))

Every bill that *is not* passed by congress is just that much more freedom
that is saved. If all the bills passed by congress over the past 100yrs.
could all be repealed no one would miss them in the least (well no one
except the STATEST). 

SAFE was a bad ideal as any law regulating crypto. I do not need DC's
permision to exercise my 1st Admendment rights any more than I need their
permision to exercise any of my rights.

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
                          
Finger whgiii@amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info
- -----------------------------------------------------------
 
Tag-O-Matic: MASOCHIST: Windows SDK programmer with a smile!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Registered User E-Secure v1.1 ES000000

iQCVAwUBM3kX0Y9Co1n+aLhhAQFNmgP+NYbfMx5fX506NhGiCQVS/3IGo2/b3IcE
mBLEsVnOwggkrz/ebO5r4rnQNhKTzd0tCqxQtGAtR7lRna/cQsFg2wqVHpwX/G70
SWrrlsm1DI0rEFKIi1bSbJ4tkDMpdQQOhtwYRDLUXHH/JuWh0B19wZZ0yYi6WwBy
3BH+23/iba0=
=QUcl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

I appreciate William's comments, but he fails to understand the reality of
the situation. Let's forget about the "furtherance" provision for a
moment.

Congress is not passing a new law in lifting export controls. Rather, it
is reducing the sweep of one it already passed that the White House has
abused.

-Declan


On Tue, 13 May 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> 
> In <v03007804af9ea94e831c@[168.161.105.191]>, on 05/13/97 at 05:32 PM,
>    Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> said:
> 
> 
> >The Net's crypto wet-dreams were demolished this afternoon by a
> >Congressional committee's fear of coffee-drenched kids and the Ku Klux
> >Klan.
> 
> [Discription of a typical day in congress sniped]
> 
> 
> >It worked. By 5:15 pm, after a dozen amendments, the committee passed the
> >"Volunteer Protection Act." As for SAFE -- well, if you're a Congressman
> >faced with the choice of bashing the KKK or tackling crypto policy, what
> >would you do?
> 
> I personaly think that this is a good thing. :)))
> 
> Every bill that *is not* passed by congress is just that much more freedom
> that is saved. If all the bills passed by congress over the past 100yrs.
> could all be repealed no one would miss them in the least (well no one
> except the STATEST). 
> 
> SAFE was a bad ideal as any law regulating crypto. I do not need DC's
> permision to exercise my 1st Admendment rights any more than I need their
> permision to exercise any of my rights.
> 
> - -- 
> - -----------------------------------------------------------
> William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
> Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0
> 
> Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
> PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
>                           
> Finger whgiii@amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info
> - -----------------------------------------------------------
>  
> Tag-O-Matic: MASOCHIST: Windows SDK programmer with a smile!
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.6.2
> Comment: Registered User E-Secure v1.1 ES000000
> 
> iQCVAwUBM3kX0Y9Co1n+aLhhAQFNmgP+NYbfMx5fX506NhGiCQVS/3IGo2/b3IcE
> mBLEsVnOwggkrz/ebO5r4rnQNhKTzd0tCqxQtGAtR7lRna/cQsFg2wqVHpwX/G70
> SWrrlsm1DI0rEFKIi1bSbJ4tkDMpdQQOhtwYRDLUXHH/JuWh0B19wZZ0yYi6WwBy
> 3BH+23/iba0=
> =QUcl
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> 
>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----


In <Pine.GSO.3.95.970513220459.18020F-100000@well.com>, on 05/13/97 at
11:07 PM,
   Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> said:


>I appreciate William's comments, but he fails to understand the reality of
>the situation. Let's forget about the "furtherance" provision for a
>moment.

>Congress is not passing a new law in lifting export controls. Rather, it
>is reducing the sweep of one it already passed that the White House has
>abused.

Well that is another issues that I had not addressed in my post: The
Userping of powers relegated to the Legislative Branch by the Excutive
Branch via Executive Order.

If Congress was intrested in doing the "right thing" then law they should
be passing should be quite small stating that the Executive Order is
Unconstitutional and by an Act of Congress is Repealed.

This is not what they are doing. What they are saying with SAFE is that you
have no Constitutional Rights on this issue but because we are nice guys we
are going to pass a law making it legal, oh by the way we are going to tack
a few riders on here for our own purposes.

The whole approach to this issue is wrong. There is *no* valid law
restricting the export of crypto. Any attempts to enforce such an invald
law should be delt with in the courts. I find that it sets a scary
presedent that I *need* congress permission before I can exercise my
Constutionally Protected Rights.

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
                          
Finger whgiii@amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info
- -----------------------------------------------------------
 
Tag-O-Matic: OS/2: Your brain.  Windows: Your brain on drugs.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Registered User E-Secure v1.1 ES000000

iQCVAwUBM3nwVY9Co1n+aLhhAQGxrgP8DSQtMaG1QH0xDYUHuvSc9KOebxXHTojM
6f21c3cKnc9kNjgO4Tqju3SQTy5mWOtyWRtzdJ+1SsUxhiNOqOnY7eXRIteViP2K
wujrKge2UqJeNOhINpwiHYbqqbA/XLXPzuyaNyegzmHSmxJCwSxhNstP25l4BSI2
3GmLswHI2M8=
=fIjb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

At 3:32 PM -0800 5/13/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:

>A two-hour debate over whether KKK volunteers could be sued for
>spilling coffee on an 8-year old at a bake sale blew through
>millions of dollars in billable lobbyist-hours and prevented the
>House Judiciary Committee from voting on Rep. Bob Goodlatte's
>(R-VA) SAFE crypto bill today.
>
>Somnolent yet somehow alert, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich) wasted an
>hour sparring with the avuncular Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Illinois) over
>the "Volunteer Protection Act," which insulates people volunteering
>for nonprofit organizations from civil liability.
>
>But would that apply to the KKK, wondered Conyers? Is the KKK a
>registered 501(c)(3) organization under the IRS code? What about
>501(c)(4) organizations? What if a KKK member decided to build houses
>for Habitat for Humanity?

Though this was presumably not the thrust of Declan's article, the notion
that "some organizations are more insulated than others" (to paraphrase
George Orwell) is itself pernicious and revealing about the nature of
Washington.

If indeed the KKK, or the Knights of Aryanism, or the Panthers of Color are
501(c) entities, which is quite possible, then *if course* they should get
whatever status other 501(c) entities get!

(The issue of state vs. Federal jurisdiction, and the "Lopez" case, is not
what's at stake here.)

When either the Federal or state government can use policy to reward
certain types of organizations, e.g., the National Organization for Women,
but punish other types of organizations, e.g., the Aryan White Peoples
Organization, then all is lost.

(But all was lost a long time ago.)

This is actually just as important a story as whether Netscape and
Microsoft will get their special export provisions while Americans face
criminal penalties for exercise of basic Constitutional rights.


Back to SAFE, though. Does this mean the bill is dead? Can we all breathe a
sigh of relief for at least a few more months?

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

Nope, SAFE isn't dead. I'll bet you a couple bucks it'll make it out of
House Judiciary in about 14 hours. Markup Wednesday at 1:30 pm, followed
by a vote on the flag burning amendment. (Oh baby!)

Goodlatte came up to me after the subcommittee vote not long ago and told
me how he had the votes on Judiciary to get it through, no sweat. But then
it goes I believe to International Relations as part of a sequential
referral. We'll see what happens there. More opposition, certainly.

There's some minor good news. The "crypto in furtherance of a crime" 
provision likely will be yanked in favor of an eight-part test that's
going to be pretty damn tough for prosecutors to prove. I have the text on
my Duo and I'm on my NeXT, so I won't include it here but I may send it
along later. (BTW, I just installed Mach Ten on my Duo. Finally, a csh
prompt on a Mac!) 

Still, I'm not happy with it. I think the best way to deal with the crypto
embargo is to let the courts decide. (I'm particularly a fan of Peter's
lawsuit.) That, and write code. 

-Declan


On Tue, 13 May 1997, Tim May wrote:
> Back to SAFE, though. Does this mean the bill is dead? Can we all breathe a
> sigh of relief for at least a few more months?