Finally catching up on some email...
I didn't write the article; it was published in the National Review, a
weekly conservative newspaper
(http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel121500.shtml). I assume they
do at least rudimentary fact checking, and I believe David Kopel, the
author, to be a careful writer.
You can find the text of the "medal of valor" legislation, which
does not look like it passed during the 106th Congress, here:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:H.R.46:
Of interest to the list is the crypto-in-a-crime provision:
(c) AMENDMENT OF SENTENCING GUIDELINES RELATING TO USE OF ENCRYPTION-
Pursuant to its authority under section 994(p) of title 28, United
States Code, the United States Sentencing Commission shall amend the
Federal sentencing guidelines and, if appropriate, shall promulgate
guidelines or policy statements or amend existing policy statements to
ensure that the guidelines provide sufficiently stringent penalties to
deter and punish persons who intentionally use encryption in
connection with the commission or concealment of criminal acts
sentenced under the guidelines.
Similar language was included in some of the "crypto liberalization"
bills such as SAFE in the past.
-Declan
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 10:00:52AM -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote:
> Declan, I've looked at the floor activity for that day, and searched
> the house record [Page: H12100 et seq]. I cannot find any mention of
> HR.46, or "encryption", or "wiretapping". I also looked at every
> reference to the word "computer", which appears frequently.
>
> Could your sources be more specific as to how this was passed?
>
> Sometimes, it's better to say "Senate" when you mean only the Senate,
> and give specific names of supporters (Stevens, Hatch), rather than
> tarring the whole "Congress" with bills that are going nowhere.
>
