Usenix Takes Stand Against ATA and SSSCA

Davin writes: "The Usenix Board of Directors has emailed all Usenix members, suggesting that they contact their Representatives to oppose ATA and SSSCA." And I've said it before, but lick a stamp. Representatives aren't tapped into the wired quite yet (Hello ... Navi)

Comments

I did-

[firewort]

I faxed all of my congressmen a week ago.
Helms wrote back saying he supported Ashcroft in every way. Edwards sent back a photocopy of some unrelated speech he gave on the Senate floor.
Price wrote back a relevant response in which he promised to be mindful of civil liberties, and shared my concerns about 'backdoors' in encryption- his was the most relevant response I received. I spoke very briefly with him this morning at a community meeting, and am going to try and schedule some face time with him to talk about PATRIOT ( H.R. 2975, the House version of the ATA) - I don't want to mix messages and bring in the SSSCA at that time, but if I can establish a rapport, then I can bring up SSSCA at a later date.

He seemed to indicate that roving wiretaps might pass, but that indefinitely detaining a non-citizen wasn't going to be passed.

SEND REAL MAIL

[FFFish]

EMAIL DON'T DO DICK.

If you can't march on down to your representative's office and bitchslap the silly ass, you gotta use POSTAL MAIL.

Not to mention, IT'S TOO LATE. If you didn't want this to go through, you should have been hustling your ass a year ago. Every freakin' indication made it pretty damn clear that the government was going to restrict your rights more and more.

Re:SEND REAL MAIL

[ediron2]

First, email's *absolute* effectiveness depends on the sen/rep involved. Pat Leahy in Vermont is pretty da**ed wired, so if he isn't reading all the messages, his staff is (with him getting a greatest hits selection and summary counts). If you're unlucky enough to be stuck with a bonehead like our state's senior senator (mamma said I could talk nasty if I didn't name names), there's a good chance he not only doesn't care about the wired segment but that he doesn't know how to connect.

Second, Email's *relative* effectiveness is a given. Effective lobbying has been analyzed until it is a stronger science than Sociology. Lobbyists and political consultants have preached these things for years, and some make 6 figures telling politicians what to concentrate on.

Here's the logic: A hypothetical politician gets 6 telexes and telegrams (they really still exist), 50 phone calls, 72 personally-typed or hand-written letters, 150 faxes, 600 obviously-form letters, and 2000 emails. On any issue, 90% of the arguments will be covered by the time they've read a few dozen, complete with a pretty strong impression of what way constituent opinions run.

So, a pol has staff sort things like so:

Gimme all the letters from people that donated $500 or more last election. Then give me another handful of good ones. Then give me a summary saying what the percentages are, breaking things down on any critical details like what aspects of the bill are deal-breakers, which ones could be altered to make a compromise, what the strongest political liabilities are given my constituent base.

The staff starts with the telexes and handwritten's, moves to regular letters, and is quickly seeing a trend: 3/4 of their constituent base should be willing to live with the bill if altered *this* way, and several fat checks from industry fatcats can be expected if the so-altered bill passes.

In the case of ATA/SSSCA: Senator DoNothing here in my backwater state will get a dozen 'No' letters from technogeeks, and six hundred 'Yes' from freaked out farmers whose kids have moved to Metropolis. He'll get a nice nudge from lobbyists and industry titans, they'll serve up a reminder of past donations, and they'll maybe even send over some second-tier J-Lo wannabe to sit on his lap and tell him how strong he is. Once she's gone, the mailstack appears. The above-guessed summary of opinions pretty much seals the fate of my opinion. I'll be part of a minority opinion, destined to live in the lower third of the stack of mail. When a position paper and related letter are drafted, I'll get one that disagrees with me, tailored a bit by an overworked staffer and signed by 'His own Rubber-Stamp'.

Speaking of which, is my saying that a potential enfringement on Pink Floyd's 'The Wall'? I was thinking of it when I wrote it, but it's under 7 words or notes so fair-use might apply. Just in case, I'm out of here. Hmm... we all were aware that opression in the mideast could start a war. I just didn't expect it to lead to more opression here!

McCarthyism

[perdida]

McCarthy did some fucked-up stuff, besides going after those who could be connected with Communism in some way.

If you opposed some despotic statute which was designed to get the Communists, you were "soft on Communism."

Consider what would happen if a new, digitally savvy McCarthy used the fears of terrorism, which are amplified by our wartime action, to push through legislation such as SSSCA.

Any legislator who opposes such a figure could be labeled "soft on terrorism."

The law is swayed by politics, and war is a juggernaut in politics. Maintain your own security, privacy and anonymity, regardless of these laws; whether they are passed or not, there are always people waiting for the excuse to tighten surveillance.

Spaff's note to Judd Gregg

[imrdkl]

At the bottom of this Usenix "Call to Arms", one finds this formal letter listed as a discussion of restrictions on encryption, by (the most honorable) Spaff, and Barbara Simons, addressed to Sen. Judd Gregg.

What surprises me is that, while many of the arguments against crypto-strangulation are quite well stated and carefully ordered, they have given only peripheral awareness to the most glaring fact. Namely, that crypto is already, and will continue to be, free software. Also not to mention the fact that it's been available on the Internet (for free) for a long, long time. relatively speaking anyways.

The propogation and long-term storage realities of the internet simply make it impossible to un-ring this bell.

Again, the only way to win this fight, is for the good guys to learn crypto as well as the bad guys. This includes ALL of the "relatively unsophisticated users", that Spaff mentions, too.

Re:There is a reason they don't read email

[spudnic]

All of your points make perfect sense. Rather than wasting time on email, does anyone know of any politicians that are using web enabled opinion polls to help them understand the thoughts of their constituants?

Each registered voter could be mailed a username and password that would allow them to voice their opinions. It would obviously have to carry a similiar disclaimer as the polls here on /., but having to login could help prevent some of the abuse. It would certainly be more relevent than email where one small group of people could generate thousands of fraudulent email messages in a few minutes. And it would definately be easier to handle for the office staff.

Have hundreds of questions or options up there that are searchable. Only reply to the ones that interest you.

Keep it constantly updated.

Be able to view the current results? I dunno, it might be better not to.

If you MUST do it, allow a comment to be added to each survey question. At least then the messages would be sorted in some sort of logical manner to be reviewed.

I know if one of my congressmen did this that they would be one up in my book when it came time for elections.

indefinite detention of non-citizens

[jonbrewer]

I'm not sure if you are aware, but the US already can detain non-citizens indefinitely. They also do not have to tell detainees what they're accused of.

Three laws passed in 1996 together allow this... and have led to over 3500 people indefinitely detained. The laws are: The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act, The Anti-Terrorist and Effective Death Penalty Act, and The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act

The ACLU has more information on these laws.

Please do not construe my post to be an opinion on anything, just information.

Re:This really works

[Malcontent]

It's also much harder to raise $10,000.00 and hand deliver to your congress critter. That's why the corporations get heard and you don't despite your mail. Such is our democracy. We went from Jim Crow laws to legalized bribery. In the end it's the same result put barriers between the people and power.

From overseas

[ballpoint]

I am living in Europe, a part of the world that, while not being the USA itself, nevertheless has very close ties with the USA.

While Europe certainly tries to follow its own course, it is affected in both good and bad ways by what's happening in the USA on nearly all fronts.

Technology is one, legislation another. Things tend to - slowly - trickle down.

This means that on the legislation side, once a law gets passed in the USA, it's likely to be adopted in one form or another in the EU as well, and it becomes extremely difficult to turn it around at that stage.

So a bad law passed in the USA is a bad law passed in the EU as well. It makes no sense to start complaining now to local legislators as they don't know yet what you are talking about. By the time they do know, it is too late.

So I'm asking for ideas about how we could help from here. Contacting an US senator probably isn't going to help, or is it ?

Re:This really works

[sadr]

Much more likely is that 4900 of the 5000 are from people in other districts who are emailing either every person in Congress or are emailing them because of their position on some committee.

Also, it is very possible that 4000 of those 4900 are generated by a small group of people, since we all know how easy it is to spam.

I won't even get into the inaccuracies of your post regarding our form of government. We're a Constitutional Republic, not a representative democracy.

And it's their job to do the right thing for their district and the country based on their opinion, not the opinions of the residents of their district. If the residents don't like their votes, they can elect someone new next election.

Re:Wired?

[Sinistar2k]

Just last week, I received a letter from one of my state reps thanking me for my input regarding Dmitry Sklyarov and the DMCA.

So, even if the topics were just punched into a database in order to pump out form letters, somebody read it. It wasn't just deleted.

Do both. Fire off a well-written e-mail now and follow it up with a well-written snail mail later.

Re:This really works

[Rogerborg]

• We're a Constitutional Republic, not a representative democracy.

Uhh... we're both. It's a descriptive term.

• And it's their job to do the right thing for their district and the country based on their opinion, not the opinions of the residents of their district. If the residents don't like their votes, they can elect someone new next election.

Sure, if you like. Although considering that your choice is this guy or that gal or a protest vote, it's no wonder that we have crappy turnouts (except when we're protest voting against The Other Guy).

But let's try and be constructive (I know this is /., but what the heck). I'd prefer to have more layers of representation (neighborhood, city/district, state, federal) where each layer elects representatives to the next level. Actually, I'd really prefer a small beaurocracy implementing regular referenda, overseen by an elected judiciary.

What's your take? Or are we fine as we are?

Re:What I can't believe

[MidnightLog]

While I won't argue with your cynicism, I do disagree with this statement when applied to the SSSCA:

Every crisis is just an excuse for the government monster to grow a bit more, and your rights to shrink.

Although our rights would shrink if the SSSCA passes, I don't think that governmental power would grow. In fact, I think that the government would be "selling off" some of their power to the entertainment industry.