PREPARED STATEMENT OF PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY PRESIDENT EAGLE FORUM Security and Freedom Through Encryption SAFE Act March 20 1997 - House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property My name is Phyllis Schlafly I'm president of Eagle Forum a national volunteer organization concerned with public policymaking on many issues including constitutional issues Thank you for inviting me to present our views on H R 695 and cryptography Our home page on the Internet is at www eagleforum org Advances in computer technology have been wonderful in so many ways but they are also constantly eroding our personal privacy Massive databases are now keeping track of our phone numbers addresses income credit records medical histories and purchases With everything connected to the Internet the only way to keep our information private is to avoid computers which is impossible or to encrypt it Encryption should be recognized as a fundamental right I believe that our right to speak in private whether in English a foreign language or in code is protected by the First Amendment to the U S Constitution and that the government cannot regulate or limit that right without seriously eroding our fundamental civil liberties I thank Congressman Goodlatte and the other sponsors of this bill for recognizing that our rights of free speech are endangered by the Justice Department It is a sad day to think that Americans might need permission from Congress to have a private conversation It should not be necessary for Congress to pass a law declaring that encryption is lawful The problem is that Attorney General Janet Reno and FBI Director Louis Freeh are giving speeches advocating the regulation of cryptography and giving the government access to our computer messages They repeatedly demand that the government be able to get a key to our telephones and computer systems Mr Freeh even says that encryption poses a ''threat to public safety '' On the contrary the threat to public safety comes from the lack of encryption and the demands of Justice Department officials to have a key so they can read our private messages Are we worried about the Justice Department abusing its power to eavesdrop on our computer messages You bet we are The misbehavior of the FBI in so many areas and the coverups that followed have been shocking to Americans who like to support law-and-order The FBI abuses are such that to give the FBI access to our computer messages would be a long dangerous step toward making America a totalitarian state We are also very concerned that a ban on ''mandatory key escrow'' might not preclude the government from other coercive key escrow plans deceptively called ''voluntary '' The Federal Government is notorious for using all sorts of weapons including intimidation and funding incentives to make something mandatory while they are loudly proclaiming it to be ''voluntary '' The right of the individual to privacy would be meaningless if the telephone companies ''voluntarily'' agree to key escrow I believe it is not only important to recognize that encryption is a right of free speech but also that encryption is a good thing not a bad thing or a criminal thing We are very opposed to the criminal penalties in this bill It is doubtful that Congress even has the constitutional authority to criminalize encryption Let's take an example It is of course lawful to use opaque envelopes Would it make sense to legislate five years in federal prison for using opaque envelopes in connection with a crime Would it stop the problem of bad checks if we were all forced to mail our checks in transparent envelopes We should punish criminals for actual crimes not for auxiliary activities that are entirely lawful and proper We don't want to move toward a nation in which any state crime becomes a federal felony merely because a computer telephone or other electronic device is involved We object strenuously to the current trend toward federalizing crimes This is offensive to our constitutional system of federalism Considering the present status of judicial activism Congress should be removing jurisdiction from the federal courts not adding to their jurisdiction We object to the implication that encryption is somehow suspect Strong encryption is one of the greatest achievements of the information age It means we will be able to talk on the telephone with assurance that no one is eavesdropping It means we can exchange E-mail make purchases and invest our money in privacy because snoops cannot decode data traffic even if they gain access to a network It should be the policy of the United States to encourage wide dissemination of strong encryption technology I thank the sponsors of H R 695 for recognizing the vital importance to individuals of unrestricted cryptography and I hope the bill will be amended to remove criminal deterrents to using cryptography This document is from the holdings of The National Security Archive Suite 701 Gelman Library The George Washington University 2130 H Street NW Washington D C 20037 Phone 202 994-7000 Fax 202 994-7005 nsarchiv@gwu edu