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.

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.

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.

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?