1 April 1998 Source: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aaces002.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Congressional Record: March 31, 1998 (Extensions)] [Page E529] From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:cr31mr98-19] AMERICA'S POLICE OPPOSE THE SAFE ACT (H.R. 695) ______ HON. GERALD B.H. SOLOMON of new york in the house of representatives Tuesday, March 31, 1998 Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, the National Sheriffs' Association, the Association of Chiefs of Police, the District Attorneys' Association, and The National Association of Attorneys General all oppose H.R. 695 (The SAFE ACT). The members of these organizations are planning to visit with Members of Congress this Spring to urge opposition to the SAFE ACT. The Justice Department found that the bill would ``severely compromise law enforcement's ability to protect the American people from the threats posed by terrorists, organized crime, child pornographers . . . and other criminals,'' the President will veto the bill if it is presented to him in its current form. The so called SAFE ACT (H.R. 695) presents an extremely one-sided response to the encryption issue. The bill was drafted by and for the software industry, at the expense of the national security and public safety needs of the American people. In an editorial, The Washington Post declared that ``the real question is whether you believe this stuff poses a significant national security threat in the wrong hands. If you do--and we think it irresponsible to assume otherwise--then it's not enough to declare uncrackable privacy a civil right. You have to at least address the question of how to minimize intrusion into that right while preserving some ability to grapple with the potential danger.'' The SAFE ACT (H.R. 695) is an unacceptable, unbalanced solution to the critical issue of encryption. it is imperative that the provisions included by the National Security Committee and the Intelligence Committee be incorporated into the Goodlatte bill in order to effect a compromise between the needs of industry and the legitimate law enforcement and international security needs of the American people. I respectfully request that you support a balanced encryption policy and oppose H.R. 695. ____________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Congressional Record: March 31, 1998 (Extensions)] [Page E531] From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:cr31mr98-25] THE AMERICAN LEGION OPPOSES H.R. 695, THE SAFE ACT ______ HON. GERALD B.H. SOLOMON of new york in the house of representatives Tuesday, March 31, 1998 Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, as you know, every major police organization in the United States, representing millions of Americans strongly oppose H.R. 695. Now our veterans have joined their efforts to defeat the bill. I have included in the Record today a letter from The American Legion which outlines their opposition to H.R. 695, the Safe Act. The American Legion concurs that there are some provisions in the original H.R. 695 that can and will be detrimental to our national security and law enforcement efforts and will advise its membership of 4 million to the bill's shortcomings. The American Legion, Washington, DC, February 25, 1998. Hon. Gerald B. Solomon, U.S. House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Representative Solomon: Thank you for advising me of your concerns with pending encryption legislation. After reviewing the legislation and reading testimony by respected authorities in law enforcement and national security matters, The American Legion concurs that there are some provisions in the original H.R. 695 that can and will be detrimental to our national security and law enforcement efforts. It is our contention that the Department of Commerce should not be making decisions that impact so strongly on our country's national security. That responsibility should be left to other agencies of the federal government who have more expertise in electronic intelligence technology. The language in the amended version of H.R. 695 (Section 3) that was developed by the House Committees on National Security and Intelligence appears to provide a degree of limitation and control in this sensitive area and is a measure we can support. The American Legion will be conducting its annual Legislative Conference at the Hyatt Regency Hotel on Capitol Hill, March 22-24. I will ask our Legislative staff to invite representatives of the Justice Department to speak on this matter. We shall also voice our concerns to Members of Congress when we make our annual visitation on March 24. Thank you for alerting us of this situation. We will continue to monitor this matter and will also advise our membership of the pending legislation and its shortcomings. Sincerely, Anthony G. Jordan, National Commander. ____________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Congressional Record: March 31, 1998 (Extensions)] [Page E532-E533] From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:cr31mr98-30] THE SAFE ACT (H.R. 695) IS DETRIMENTAL TO ISRAEL'S NATIONAL SECURITY ______ HON. GERALD B.H. SOLOMON of new york in the house of representatives Tuesday, March 31, 1998 Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, below is the Clinton Administration's official position regarding the effect of immediate decontrol of encryption technology on Israel. The potential consequences of an immediate decontrol of encryption exports is of international concern. This is not an issue for United States alone. As proposed in H.R. 695 (the SAFE ACT), the immediate decontrol of encryption exports would likely result in the proliferation of strong encryption to entities such as terrorists groups which then could use encryption to hide their plans and intentions. Such a move will have a destabilizing effect on national security worldwide. The proponents of H.R. 695 maintain that our enemies and Israel's enemies will eventually possess encryption technology. This may be true, but fails to explain why we should rush to make this technology available to our enemies. The United States and Israel need time to develop a strategy and countermeasures to address these new technologies [[Page E533]] and for this reason H.R. 695 should be opposed. ____________________ -------------------------------------------------------------------------