If the Congressional Privacy Caucus actually did anything, it could be a
very dangerous group. It's primarily a collection of folks not known for
their commitment to freedom and liberty.
It is not focused on government invasions of privacy, and is instead
intended to lobby for severe restrictions on businesses' use of
information. The goals seem worthwhile, but the means are not. Regulations
they demand would require businesses to open their books -- "an individual
must have access to personably identifiable information held by a private
company" -- to individuals in a way that invites unintended consequences.
Some of the principles that ostensibly apply to government agencies --
"individuals must be informed in a clear and conspicuous manner when...
governmental agencies plan to collect... personally identifiable
information" -- clearly won't. The NSA is not likely to request permission
when conducing Echelonesque surveillance, and the FBI is not known for
asking nicely before wiretapping you.
The Congressional members of this new caucus generally are not known for
their opposition to recent government invasions of privacy, and bills they
have championed would rob us of our most cherished freedoms. I'm not sure
why this caucus will be any different.
Background:
http://www.senate.gov/~shelby/press/prsrs314.htm
http://www.senate.gov/~shelby/press/prsrs315.htm
http://daschle.senate.gov/releases/00/02/2000209705.html
http://torricelli.senate.gov/Live_NEWS.htm
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:s.00809:
Markey background:
http://www.house.gov/markey/cp_telecommunications.htm
http://www.house.gov/markey/cp_health.htm
http://www.house.gov/markey/cp_finance.htm
>From: Kent Lassman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: CPC.
>Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 17:58:27 -0500
>
>What's up with the Congressional Privacy Caucus? It seems that when
>Democrats like Tom Daschle, Paul Sarbanes, and Barbara Boxer team up on an
>issue the very essence of individual liberty is not on the tips of their
>tounges. While I'm glad to see the Hill take an interest in the issue and
>its role in a healthy and functioning market economy, I'm ready to wager
>that the first of their proposals will be pro-regulatory. Note to self, Bob
>Torricelli says that his new legislation is not pro-regulatory...it only
>would clog up the civil justice system with even more crank lawsuits.
From National Journal's Tech Daily Thursday:
>"When everyone from Joe Barton to Ed Markey calls
>for greater privacy, it is not a question of if, but a question of how and
>when," Barton said, comparing his conservative record with
>Markey's more liberal one.
>Barton said one of the reasons he joined the group
>was that it had the support of House Republican leaders. "That way it is
>hard to
>say that this is a Democratic issue," he said.
>Meanwhile, the dozen Senate Democrats who met during
>the task force's first meeting have taken a different approach. The group
>is hoping to build consensus among Democrats on privacy
>and promote Democratic initiatives, according to a source who attended
>the meeting.
>Democratic senators who attended the closed-door
>meeting included Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota, Paul
>Sarbanes of Maryland, Barbara Boxer of California,
>Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, Ron Wyden of Oregon, Robert
>Torricelli of New Jersey, and Richard Durbin of Illinois.
-Declan
At 00:13 2/11/2000 -0500, Matthew Gaylor wrote:
>FCF's Dean Lauds Congressional Privacy Caucus
>
>Privacy: 'single most important issue facing American citizens'
>
>WASHINGTON, DC - Today the Free Congress Foundation lauded the formation of
>the bipartisan, bicameral Congressional Privacy Caucus.
>
>"We laud the tenacity of Sens. Shelby and Bryan and Reps. Markey and Barton
>for being among the first in Congress to take the initiative on the single
>most important issue facing American citizens going into the next century,"
>said Free Congress Foundation's Vice President for Technology Policy Lisa S.
>Dean. "It is critical that we establish laws and regulations regarding
>individual privacy while the technology designed to protect it is still in
>its infancy."
>
>"We must rely on Congress - and not the courts or federal agencies - to
>decide what our rights are in the information age. And I am delighted to
>see these members take this initiative by lending their voices to those of
>Rep. Bob Barr, who has long been warning the public about the erosion of
>their privacy through regulation and legislation," said Dean.
>
>"This is a great today for all Americans," said Free Congress Foundation
>spokesman Robert McFarland. "The formation of this caucus will bring
>privacy concerns to the forefront and serve to move the debate in the
>direction of protecting Americans' private information. Now more than ever
>we need legislation protecting our privacy from Big Brother and his Little
>Brother in corporate America."
>
>On August 16, 1999 The Washington Times reported the following on the state
>of medical privacy:
>
>"Executives at more than a third of the Fortune 500 companies scan their
>employees' medical files before making hiring, firing and promotion
>decisions. An untold number of smaller businesses with self-insured medical
>plans do that as well. Life insurers increasingly obtain data on clients'
>genetic backgrounds and use the information to drop coverage or reject
>applicants who might contract an illness others in their family have had.
>Health maintenance organizations gather data that allow them to recruit only
>the healthiest clients -- a tactic known as "cherry-picking." Internet
>information brokers sell for about $400 an individual's complete medical
>file to any interested person with a computer and cash, including lawyers,
>detectives, political and business foes or vindictive neighbors.
>Drug-company marketers buy patient lists from pharmacies for about 30 cents
>apiece, then make direct-mail drug pitches to heart patients, diabetics,
>arthritis suffers and others."
>
>###
>
>The Free Congress Foundation is a 21-year-old Washington based think tank,
>which teaches people how to be effective in the political process, advocates
>judicial reform, promotes cultural conservatism, and works against the
>government encroachment of individual liberties.
>
>Visit Our Website at http://www.FreeCongress.org
>
>This publication is a service of the Free Congress Research and Education
>Foundation, Inc. (FCF) and does not necessarily reflect the views of the
>Free Congress Foundation nor is it an attempt to aid or hinder the passage
>of any bill.
>
>Free Congress Foundation, 717 Second Street NE, Washington, DC 20002
>202.546.3000 x450 Fax: 202.544.2819 Project Manager: Angela Wheeler
>
>Copyright * 2000 Free Congress Foundation - All Rights Reserved.
