Re: Clipper and Congress

[pcw@access.digex.net (Peter Wayner)]

><In mail Stanton McCandlish said:>
>
>> Unlike the Senate panel, there seemed to be some support for the Clipper 
>> proposal on the House Subcommittee.  Rep. Dan Glickman (D-KS), 
>
>  I wonder if these Representatives (and Senators for that matter) would be
>  so supportive of Clipper if they were reminded that for it to be effective
>  even THEY would have to have the chip on THEIR HOME PHONES, THEIR OFFICE
>  PHONES, THEIR CELLULAR PHONES...
>
>  I doubt many Congressional members are "clean" enough to support a chip
>  with such a threat over their lives.
>
>  "Hey, Rep. Joe Smith, did you know that if someone wanted to make a few
>   dollars they could get the key from escrow and blackmail you about that
>   affair you've been having!?"
>
>          Just a thought
>                 Jim
>

At one of the earlier CSSPAB board meetings, a bunch of law enforcement
officers came to speak about Clipper. They pointed out that 13 states
do not allow their state and local police to use wiretaps. Some officers
surmised that this was because wiretaps are really valuable in cases
of bribery and corruption. I.e. where crimes can be committed through
talking. 



>-- 
> Tantalus Inc.          Jim Sewell      Amateur Radio: KD4CKQ
> P.O. Box 2310          Programmer           Internet: jims@mpgn.com
> Key West, FL 33045     C-Unix-PC          Compu$erve: 71061,1027
> (305)293-8100                            PGP via email on request. 
> 1K-bit Fingerprint: 8E 14 68 90 37 87 EF B3  C4 CF CD 9A 3E F9 4A 73