[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 105 (Thursday, July 30, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9419-S9420]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     MEDIA CAMPAIGN HELPS INFORM CONGRESSIONAL ACTION ON ENCRYPTION

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I rise to recognize the continuing efforts 
of Americans for Computer Privacy (ACP), a broad-based advocacy 
coalition, to energize the discussion now taking place in Washington on 
encryption. ACP has a role since they represent industry, private 
citizens and interest groups from all sides of the political spectrum. 
The computer industry believes, as do many members in both the House 
and Senate, that it is time to reform America's outdated encryption 
regime. Last week, an important step was taken when a multimedia 
campaign was launched to raise Congressional and public awareness on 
the encryption issue. This campaign includes television commercials, 
print media, and an online banner component with such statements as, 
``would you give the government the keys to your safety deposit box or 
home.'' In the past few days, television commercials highlighting the 
need for encryption reform have appeared during Good Morning America, 
the Today show, Hardball, and Cross Fire.
  Mr. President, ACP has an impressive membership which includes such 
organizations as the Law Enforcement Alliance of America, the Louisiana 
Sheriff's Association, American Small Business Alliance, Americans for 
Tax Reform, Electronic Commerce Forum, Information Technology Industry 
Council, the National Association of Manufacturers, the U.S. Chamber of 
Commerce, and over sixty technology companies. It's bipartisan advisory 
panel includes several intelligence and law enforcement experts such as 
former National Security Advisor Richard Allen, former NSA Deputy 
Director William Crowell, former CIA Director John Deutch, former FBI 
Director William Webster, and former San Jose Police Chief Joseph 
McNamara. This array adds credibility to their message.
  As you are well aware, encryption plays a significant role in our 
daily lives. This technology scrambles and unscrambles computer text to 
keep private communications from being read by unauthorized individuals 
such as hackers, thieves, and other criminals. Encryption protects 
private citizens credit card numbers when they buy something over the 
Internet, ensures that only authorized medical personnel can read a 
patients' medical records stored on a hospital database, shields tax 
information that we send to the IRS, and safeguards personal letters 
that we E-mail to loved ones. Encryption means that American companies 
can protect confidential employee information, such as salary and 
performance data; valuable trade secrets and competitive bidding 
information; and critical target market data.
  Encryption also benefits America's security by protecting our 
nation's critical infrastructures, like the power grid, 
telecommunications infrastructure, financial networks, air traffic 
control operations, and emergency response systems. Strong encryption 
thwarts infiltration attempts by computer hackers and terrorists who 
have destructive, life threatening intent.
  Yes, this is an issue that truly affects all Americans.
  By allowing a public policy that limits encryption to continue, we 
risk sending more potential U.S. business overseas. This approach only 
serves to harm America's economic and national security interest by 
encouraging criminals to purchase foreign made products now widely 
available with unlimited encryption strength. By contrast, the broad 
development and use of American encryption products should be 
advantageous to our law enforcement and intelligence communities.
  I must say that I am deeply troubled by the comments made by Commerce 
Under Secretary William Reinsch, head of the Bureau of Export 
Administration, in response to ACP's efforts. Apparently, Under 
Secretary Reinsch doubts that this initiative will work--that industry 
and privacy advocates are wasting their money. I disagree. This media 
campaign is rightfully educating the public about the importance of 
encryption in our every day lives. These advertisements make clear that 
encryption technology preserves our First Amendment right to freedom of 
speech and our Fourth Amendment freedom against unreasonable search and 
seizure. They illustrate that we need strong security to keep all 
Americans safe from infrastructure attack. And they explain that 
Americans and computer users everywhere must feel confident in the 
knowledge that their private information will remain private. Clearly, 
the development and use and strong encryption is critical if Internet 
commerce is going to grow to its full potential and sustain the 
economic engine that is driving this country into the 21st century.
  I believe this advertising campaign is yet another indication of 
industry's willingness and desire to find a reasonable solution to the 
encryption issue. Industry and privacy groups, for example, have been 
working in earnest with Administration officials for several months. In 
May, a proposed interim solution to the encryption issue was offered. 
The Administration responded that it would take five to six months to 
review the proposal. This reaction in conjunction with Under Secretary 
Reinsch's recent comments, lead many in Congress, from both sides of 
the aisle, to conclude that the Administration, despite what it has 
been saying publicly, does not want to see a balanced resolution before 
this Congress adjourns.
  Mr. President, I think it is also important to reiterate that the 
Administration's restrictions against U.S. encryption exports and its 
proposals to control domestic use just cannot work. Innovation in the 
high tech industry is relentless and ubiquitous. The government cannot 
stop it. It is for this reason that industry is trying to persuade the 
Administration that innovation is the solution to this issue, not the 
enemy. Two weeks ago, a coalition of thirteen companies proposed 
``private doorbells'', a technology solution that would provide law 
enforcement with court approved access to computer messages. Clearly, 
industry leaders want to help officials capture criminals and 
terrorists. I believe the ideas they have put forward are reasonable 
and responsible. On the other hand, I do not believe the 
Administration's response has been forthcoming. Encryption policy can 
be modernized with the stroke of a pen, but the Administration has 
shown little willingness. Thus, industry takes appropriate action by 
implementing a media campaign.
  While encryption is a complex and divisive information technology 
issue, this media initiative reinforces the need for legislation to 
bring America's encryption policy into the 21st century. The national 
security and law enforcement communities have legitimate concerns that 
must be considered. I believe that the best way to deal with these 
concerns is to pass during this Congress legislation that strikes a 
balance on encryption. Legislation that would help keep private and 
corporate communications away from

[[Page S9420]]

hackers, terrorists and other criminals, provide a level playing field 
for U.S. encryption manufacturers, and ensure Constitutional 
protections for all Americans. A number of my colleagues have been 
pushing for this type of reform for years and several competing 
encryption bills have been offered in both the House and Senate during 
this session.
  Mr. President, as you may recall, I engaged in a colloquy with my 
colleagues last week which reinforced the need for Congress to act 
during this session to break the impasse. This is a difficult issue, 
not easily explained or understood, but it is a crucial one. Momentum 
has been built in both the House and Senate toward finding a workable 
solution. Congress must seize upon these efforts and pass a consensus 
encryption bill now or risk starting all over during the next session. 
Congress has come too far on this issue to go back to the beginning.
  Americans need a sound and reasonable encryption policy that protects 
public safety, reinforces security, promotes digital privacy, and 
encourages online commerce and economic growth. Without the development 
and use of powerful encryption, we may bear the consequences of the 
next hacker's attack on the Pentagon's information network, a terrorist 
attack on the city's power supply, or a thief's attack on the 
international financial markets.
  With over $60 billion and over 200,000 jobs at stake by the year 
2000, the House and Senate cannot continue to hope that the 
Administration will reach an amicable solution that satisfies the needs 
of all parties. I strongly encourage my colleagues to report out a 
balanced encryption bill that Congress can act on before the end of 
this session. Before it is too late.

                          ____________________