THE CAMPAIGN TO STOP THE WIRETAP PLAN (AND SAVE $500 MILLION) wiretap@epic.org "As a means of espionage, writs of assistance and general warrants are but puny instruments of tyranny and oppression when compared with wire-tapping." - Justice Brandeis, 1928 "Where in the US Constitution does it say that the federal government has the right to tap your phone?" - Wired, November, 1994 In a case reported last year a federal judge threw out all evidence obtained from FBI wiretaps in what was described as the most expensive white-collar investigation in Kansas City history. The 96-page report of the reviewing magistrate concluded that the FBI's affidavit "presented a disturbing pattern of material misstatements, overstatements and omissions designed to mislead the issuing district court." The outcome is a "stunning repudiation of FBI tactics." - Kansas City Star, Feb 9, 1994 CONTENTS (Updated April 18, 1995) [1] What You Can Do [2] Background on Wiretap Plan [3] Activities in Congress [4] Budget Excerpt on Wiretap Plan [5] Recent Developments: Freeh in Congress, EPIC in Merc [6] Sample letter to Congress [7] Organizations Opposed to Funding [8] Wiretap Resources ============================================================= [1] What You Can Do ============================================================= - Contact your representative and urge the elimination of funding for the "Telephone Carrier Compliance" program contained in the appropriation for the Department of Justice. (Sample letter follows.) - Contact the House Subcommittee on Appropriations, Chaired by Congressman Hal Rogers (R-KY). Urge Mr. Rogers and the Subcommittee to oppose funding for the Telephone Carrier Compliance program. (Sample letter follows.) - Call 800/651-1489 to arrange for the delivery of Western Union Mailgrams(r) to your representative and to the Chairman and Ranking Minority on the House Subcommittee on Appropriations ($10 charge). The Mailgrams will help ensure that the Appropriations Subcommittee gives careful consideration to the proposal. - Write a letter to the editor of your local paper. Explain the problem with the wiretap plan and why you believe funding is a bad idea. Also, call your local talk radio station. - Forward this message to others who might be concerned about the wiretap plan. Or simply tell friends to send email to wiretap@epic.org or call 800/651-1489. - Send information about responses you receive from Members of Congress to wiretap@epic.org Thanks for your efforts. You can make a difference. ============================================================= [2] Background on Wiretap Plan ============================================================= The wiretap plan, also known as the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994, will require telecommunications carriers and manufacturers of telecommunications equipment to make it easy to wiretap the nation's communication system. The key provisions of the bill requires that new communication systems be designed to: - Isolate a particular electronic communication - Isolate call-identifying information - Deliver intercepted information to a remote government monitoring location - Deliver information to the government without disclosing the government's activity The proposal faced strong opposition from industry and civil liberties organizations last year. But the bill went forward after the government offered to pay companies $500,000,000 to make the proposed changes. FBI Director Lou Freeh argued that the legislation was necessary to preserve crime-fighting abilities of law enforcement. But critics charge that the plan will be costly, unwieldy, and leave the nation's telephone system more vulnerable to criminal misuse. Last year EPIC brought suit against the FBI to obtain records relating to the program. To date none of the documents disclosed to the public have established the need for a nationwide program to reengineer the telephone network. Earlier documents obtained from FBI field offices found that no technical obstacles to wiretapping were encountered. The wiretap plan has also been linked to the controversial Clipper Chip proposal, announced by the National Security Agency in 1993. Both the Clipper technical standard and the wiretap legislation were developed jointly by the FBI and the NSA. Clipper also faced strong opposition from industry and civil liberties groups. The White House reportedly backed off Clipper after a petition signed by 47,000 Internet users was delivered to the President last year. Although $500m was authorized last year for the wiretap program, Congress must now decide whether to appropriate the funds for the program. Already there is some indication that Congress may be reluctant to fund the program. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) recommended a funding by an increase in civil fines rather than a new appropriation in anticipation of criticism about the expenditure. Of course, the money that is raised by civil fines could be used for other programs or to reduce the deficit. OMB also asked only for $100m for the first year, when it was expected that the government would seek $125m. Public opposition to the funding now will also make it more difficult for the government to seek new restrictions on private communications later, such as limitations on encryption or surveillance requirements for Internet communications. Let Congress know that you object to spending $500,000,000 to make it easy to wiretap private communication! ============================================================= [3] Action in Congress ============================================================= The funding of a federal program is a two-step process. First the oversight committee authorizes the expenditure of funds. Next the appropriations committee allocates the funds. Because Congress is in a budget-cutting mood, the appropriations committee are looking closely at ideas for reducing spending. Therefore, the Appropriations subcommittee will play a critical role in the decision whether to fund the wiretap plan. The Congressional subcommittee that will consider funding for the Telephone Carrier Compliance Program is the House Subcommittee on Appropriation for Commerce, State, Justice. The members of the subcommittee are: Chairman Harold Rogers (R-5th KY), House Appropriations Subcommittee, H-309 Capitol, Washington, DC 20515 202/225- 3351 (tel) 202/225-0940 (fax) Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-5th AZ), 205 CHOB, Washington, DC 20515 202/225-2542 (tel) 202/225-0378 (fax) Rep. Charles H. Taylor (R-11th NC), 231 CHOB, Washington, DC 202/225-6401 (tel) 202/225-0519 (fax) Rep. Ralph Regula (R-16th OH), 2309 RHOB, Washington, DC 20515 202/225-3876 (tel) 202/225-3059 (fax) Rep. Michael Forbes (R-1st NY), 502 CHOB, Washington, DC 20515 202/225-3826 (tel) 202/225-3143 (fax) Chairman Bob Livingston (R-1st LA), House Appropriations Committee, H-218 Capitol, Washington, DC 20515 202/225-2771 (tel) Rep. Alan B. Mollahan (D-1st WV), 2427 RHOB, Washington, DC 20515 202/225-4172 (tel) 202/225-7564 (fax) Rep. David E. Skaggs (D-2nd CO), 1124 LHOB, Washington, DC 20515 202/225-2161 (tel) 202/225-9127 (fax) Rep. Julian C. Dixon (D-32nd CA), 2252 RHOB, Washington, DC 20515 202/225/7084 (tel) 202/225-4091 (fax) Rep. David R. Obey (D-7th WI), House Appropriations Committee, 1016 LHOB, Washington, DC 20515 202/225-2481 (tel) If any of these members represent your district, it is particularly important to write and express your opposition to the Telephone Carrier Compliance program. ============================================================= [4] Budget Excerpt on Wiretap Plan ============================================================= (From the Budget of the United States FY1996, Appendix, Federal Bureau of Investigation, p. 666) Telephone Carrier Compliance "The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 authorizes the Attorney General to pay telecommunications carriers for costs directly associated with modifying equipment to perform court-authorized wiretap. Activities eligible for reimbursement include modifications performed by carriers in connection with equipment, facilities, and services installed or deployed to comply with the Act. In particular, telecommunications carriers are required to expeditiously isolate and enable intercept of all wire and electronic communications, provide access to call-identifying information that is reasonably available to the carrier, deliver the intercepts and call- identifying information to the government, and provide these services unobtrusively so as to minimize interference to subscriber services." "The program, administered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, is funded through a surcharge of approximately 30% imposed on civil monetary penalties and criminal fines. For 1996, the Federal Bureau of Investigation will use $100 million in increased fines and penalties to finances the telephone carrier compliance." (P. 66) Effect of offsetting collection from non-federal sources is that there are no new net outlays. 'Improving Technology - Digital Telephony: On October 25, the President signed the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, ensuring the Government's ability to conduct court-authorized wiretaps as the nation converts from analog to digital communications technology. The budget proposes $100 million to reimburse telecommunications carriers for modifying equipment, facilities, and services to continue enabling the Government to conduct wiretaps. The needed funds would come from a 30-percent surcharge ion civil monetary penalties and criminal fines (presuming that the need authorizing legislation is enacted." ============================================================= [5] Recent Developments: Freeh in Congress, EPIC in Merc ============================================================= [FREEH TESTIMONY IN CONGRESS] On March 30, 1995, FBI Director Louis J. Freeh testified before the House Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime. Freeh had this to say about funding for the wiretap plan and encryption: "Another issue looms on the horizon that ultimately could be as devastating to the fight against drugs by law enforcement as any other factor. If lost, the effect will be so profound that I believe law enforcement will be unable to recover. In 1968, Congress passed legislation giving law enforcement the court-authorized wiretap. It has become a technique crucial to the fight against drugs, terrorism, kidnapping and sophisticated white-collar crime. The ability to conduct court- authorized electronic surveillance is fundamental to our ability to protect both public safety and national security. "Last year, after careful deliberation, Congress passed legislation to ensure continuing access to criminal conversations in the face of the incredible advance of telecommunications technology. Had Congress not done so, we would have lost the ability to access, pursuant to court order, criminal conversations. All that remains on the access issue is funding consistent with the authorization to ensure carrier compliance. I have been advised that the Administration will soon be sending legislation to address this funding issue. "Even though access is all but assured, an even more difficult problem with court-authorized wiretaps looms. Powerful encryption is becoming commonplace. The drug cartels are buying sophisticated communications equipment. Unless the issue of encryption is resolved soon, criminal conversations over the telephone and other communications devices will become indecipherable by law enforcement. "This, as much as any issue, jeopardizes the public safety and national security of this country. Drug cartels, terrorists, and kidnappers will use telephones and other communications media with impunity knowing that their conversations are immune from our most valued investigative technique. "This is an extremely difficult issue. We are working hard to address adequately the important law enforcement, national security, commercial, and privacy concerns associated with this matter. I anticipate that as we proceed with solving this issue, we will be consulting with Congress." [EPIC LETTER IN SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, APRIL 8, 1995] "Don't Make Wiretapping Any Easier" "There are several points to clarify in the April 1 report on the Electronic Privacy Information Center's campaign to squelch funding for the FBI wiretap plan. "First, we do not object to court authorized wiretaps. We oppose the effort to require that such wiretaps be made easy. There is nothing in the Constitution or the original federal wiretap law that created such an obligation. The reason is obvious. The Fourth Amendment is intended to protect the public from abuse by government, not to coerce the public to make the work of the government easy. "Second, we do not accept the FBI's contention that digital technologies have frustrated law enforcement investigations. Wiretapping in the United States is at an all-time high. Law enforcement also routinely searches through telephone records in electronic form, a process made far easier as a result of the growth of digital networks. Cellular phones are easily overheard, and remote monitoring technologies are vastly improved. "It's therefore no surprise that in a series of documents obtained by EPIC under the Freedom of Information Act, FBI field offices repeatedly responded 'no problems encountered' when queried about the impact of new technologies by FBI Headquarters. "Third, the wiretap bill is cut of the same cloth as the Clipper proposal. Both proposals were developed by the same federal agencies with the same goal. Both seek the holy grail of absolute surveillance, an aim the US government has never previously pursued. "Fourth, it is almost inconceivable that in this era of dramatic budget cuts and down-sizing of federal services, the Congress should appropriate such a staggering sum of money to fund an untested, widely criticized, inherently flawed proposal for surveillance of the nation's communications infrastructure. One does not have to be a strong believer in privacy or civil liberties to see the folly behind this plan. "Readers interested in learning more about the wiretap bill should send email to wiretap@epic.org. Marc Rotenberg, director Electronic Privacy Information Center ============================================================= [6] Sample letter to Congress ============================================================= (This is a sample letter to Congress on the wiretap funding. Feel free to make changes and to add your own points. If you're too busy, call the Privacy Hotline at 800/651-1489. Copies of the letter will be sent to your representative and to Congressman Hal Rogers (R-KY), chair of the Subcommittee on Appropriations, and Congressman Alan Mollohan (D-WV), ranking minority member of the Subcommittee.) Dear Congressman I am writing to you to oppose funding for the Telephone Carrier Compliance program -- the wiretap plan -- contained in the budget for the Department of Justice. I believe that it is a mistake for the government to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to wiretap the information highway. I am also concerned that this program will make the telephone system more vulnerable to misuse. We need good technology for privacy and security, not wiretapping and surveillance. The experience with the Clipper chip already proved that government proposals for electronic surveillance will be very unpopular with American business and the American public. I understand that the Department of Justice is trying to hide the cost for this program by spending civil fines received by the government. I think this is wrong. Funds collected by the government are taxpayer dollars. Congress should decide how that money should be spent. Funding should be available for appropriate law enforcement activities, but the wiretap program is too expensive and just a bad idea. Also, with many government programs being cut back, it is a bad time to launch a new program that is so controversial. Privacy is an important American value. A vote to reduce government surveillance is a vote to support basic American freedoms. Thank you for considering my views. Please let me know how you plan to vote on the funding for the wiretap program. Sincerely yours, ============================================================= [7] Organizations Opposed to Funding of Telephone Carrier Compliance Program ============================================================= American Civil Liberties Union (info@aclu.org) Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (cpsr@cpsr.org) also Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Palo Alto Civil Liberties Working Group Electronic Frontier Foundation (info@eff.org) Electronic Privacy Information Center (info@epic.org) Libertarian Party Privacy International (pi@privacy.org) US Privacy Council Voters Telecomm Watch (vtw@vtw.com) (If your organization opposes funding for the wiretap plan, send email to wiretap@epic.org) ============================================================= [8] Wiretap Resources ============================================================= EPIC Web Page on the Wiretap Campaign http://cpsr.org/cpsr/privacy/epic/wiretap/wiretap.html The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 ftp://cpsr.org/cpsr/privacy/epic/wiretap/1994_telephony_law.txt FBI Director Freeh's Congressional Testimony on CALEA and banning encryption ftp://cpsr.org/cpsr/privacy/epic/wiretap/freeh_testimony_3_30.txt ============== END WIRETAP UPDATE 4-18-95 ================== _________________________________________________________________________ Marc Rotenberg (Rotenberg@epic.org) * 202-544-9240 (tel) Electronic Privacy Information Center * 202-547-5482 (fax) 666 Pennsylvania Ave, SE, Suite 301 * ftp/gopher/wais cpsr.org Washington, DC 20003 * HTTP://epic.digicash.com/epic