REPORT OFTHE REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON PRIVACY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 10
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 21, 2001
• Sequence Number: 101
• Publication Date: September 12, 1974
• Content Type: REPORT

-lI 9234
Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527ROO
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
President Ford has announced his op-
position to such an increase until Janu-
ary 1, 1975, Under existing congressional
procedures, the proposed raise will not go
into effect on October 1 unless the House
or the Senate passes a resolution sup-
porting the recommended increase.
.I intend to vote for a resolution in the
House of Representatives to insure that
Federal employees receive the recom-
mended increase on October 1, 1974.
Prior to 1970, Congress alone weighed
the merits of Federal pay rates each
year. The new system, based on the rec-
ommendations of the Director of OMB
and Chairman of the Civil Service Com-
mission, was designed to provide a rea-
soned analysis and criteria for any sal-
ary increases. This year, after consider-
able study, the recommendation was
made to increase pay by 5.5 percent as
of October 1.
In my view, that recommendation is
sound.
The last Federal pay increase, of 4.77
percent, was instituted in October 1973.
Since that time, the cost of living has
increased approximately 11 percent.
Thus, the recommended salary boost only
makes up for about half of the dollars
eaten up by inflation. In my opinion, a
5.5 percent pay raise is neither unjus-
tified nor exorbitant.
While many workers in the private
sector have received pay advances of
varying sizes during the past year, Fed-
eral employees have not received such a
needed increase. Pay scales for Federal
employment are not comparable with
those in many areas of the private sector.
It is not wise public policy to allow that
disparity to widen.
The proposed pay increase is moderate,
reasonable, and merited: For me to vote
to defer it would be unfair to Federal
employees who, even with this recom-
mended raise, will be unable to retrieve
the buying power lost during the past
12 mouths.
Thus, I will support a House resolu-
tion to reject any deferment and to pro,-
IN SUPPORT OF THE 1974 R OAD
RETIREMENT AMEND S
The SPEAKER pro temp . Under a
previous order of the Ho the gentle-
man from Illinois (Mr. R . BACK) is rec-
ognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. RAILSBACK. Speaker, for
some time now the to make major
changes in the rail d retirement pro-
gram has been rec ized. Congress took
official notice of t need when it created
a Commission Railroad. Retirement
under Public 91-377. The Commis-
sion was dire d to recommend changes
in the railr retirement program that
would pro a adequate benefits on an
actuarial ound basis. The problem was
that the vel of benefits was more than
the fining provided could support. The
repor f the Commission was filed on
Jun 0, 1972, and recommended a major
wo-tier program with one tier being so-
cial security benefits and the other a
staff retirement program similar to the
private pensions provided by employers in
other industries.
Last year, Congress took a first step
in this direction when it changed the
railroad retirement tax structure so that
railroad workers would pay the same tax
that other workers pay for social security
with the difference-4.75 percent-in the
taxes they had been paying being added
to the employer tax. At the same time
railroad employers and railroad employ-
ees were instructed to get together and
work out in a practical way implementa-
tion of the Commission's recommenda-
tions.
The bill before us this afternoon is the
eptember 12, 1974
rity benefits paid to the railroad em-
ployee. Thus, from the railroad point of
view, the railroad program is in effect
paying the social security benefit.
When this situation was considered by
the Commiss
it was the
road empl
a windfa
been pr
cause
T
progr .
that 'Vallthou
thi,
ci
result of negotiations between railway ,preserving these benefit rights for peo-
labor and railway management. Follow-: ple who had already earned them, of
ing the directions of the Congress, repre financing the cost of this preservation,
agreement as to how the railroad reti - sound financial basis was-perhaps the
ment program might be restructured major problem facing railway manage-
along the lines recommended by?`the ment and labor when they were trying
Commission on Railroad Retiri#inent. to decide how the Commission's recom-
They sent their recommendati s to 4iiendations might be put into operation.
Congress in the form of a draft;>, and The solution they arrived at is not the
with some modification, that the bill perfect solution that exists in theory. It
we are now discussing. is a practical and workable solution, per-
The legislation, involving,ks it does a haps the best under the. circumstances.
rewriting of the Railroad Retirement Unfortunately, the cost of the solution
Act, is very complicated. 'ii its details. has to be provided, and the bill H.R.
The concept, however, l.a somewhat less 15301 would authorize an appropriation
complicated. Under theiill, the railroad from the general revenues to meet these
retirement program would be restruc- costs. Given the current condition of our
tured so that all p~ople entering rail- economy, I wish. it could be otherwise.
way employment in'the future would re- But, if the railroad industry were to be
ceive a railroad an iuity computed in two asked to pay this cost-which came about
and part will;;
both, however, will be paid in one check
issued by tjt'6 Railroad Retirement Board.
For pebe now getting railroad bene-
fits, th e will be no visible change in the
annui~#ies they get although there will be
sonlIV change in the way the Board does
it'bookkeeping and other paperwork.
The major change in the program will
dome for people who are now working in
the railroad industry and who have also
worked under the social security program
long enough to qualify for social security
receive an additional payment above th
two tiers mentioned earlier.
the railroad. program will be greatly re
duced over the long-run. The reasons fo
this reduction came about because of the
unique relationship between the railroad
program and social security. Under the
law, funds are transferred between the
railroad program and social security in
a way that places the social security
fund in the same position it would have
been in had railroad employment been
covered under social security. 41 practi-
cal terms this means that each year the
social security program transfers a sig-
nificant amount of money-about $1 bil-
lion a year-to the railroad program.
There is, however, a flaw in the provi-
sion that comes into play when a person
works under both social security and the
railroad program. When this happens
the payments to the railroad program
are cut by the amount of the social secu-
because Congress provided underfinanced
benefits-railway shipping costs would
have to be increased, and these costs
would in turn be passed on to the con-
sumer. Therefore, because this legisla-
tion has the less inflationary effect, I will
vote for it.
Mr. Speaker, If we do not pass H.R.
15301, the situation of the program will
worsen. We must protect the rights of
present workers and annuitants. Enact-
ment of the bill would finance the pro-
gram in a sound way, and, without fur-
ther delay, I urge that enactment.
he Commission recognized
REPORT OF THE REPUBLICAN TASK
FORCE ON PRIVACY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from California (Mr. GOLDWATER)
is recognized for 30 minutes.
Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. Speaker, it is
with a good deal of pride and optimism
that I take this time to announce to my
colleagues that on August 21, 1974, the
Republican Task Force on Privacy, of the
Republican Research Committee, issued
its report. It was a day of note for the
people of the United States, the Con-
-gress, and the Republican Party. This re-
port is the first and most comprehensive
statement on the general subject of pri-
vacy issued by either party, or by any
congressional committee.
Serving on the task force with me-
and, I might add, making this task force
far more than just another study group-
were TENNYSON GUYER and ALAN STEEL-
MAN, who served as cochairmen; JOHN
CONLAN, MARGARET HECKLER, ANDREW
HINSHAW, FRANK HORTON, JACK KEMP,
Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
 Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
September 12, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE
covery of capital already committed to
productive resources-which constitutes
that flow.
While retained earnings have been a
major source of capital, with sharehold-
ers receiving about 40 percent in the
form of dividends on stock owned and
with companies keeping the remaining
60 percent for capital reinvestment,
there is now a growing pressure from
shareholders, as the value of stocks
decline, for a greater percentage for
themselves. When share values decline,
stockholders want a larger percentage of
the retained earnings in order to at least
maintain the same prior dollar level of
dividends. Thus, if share values continue
to be depressed, dividend payouts will be
a substantially higher percentage of
profits, thereby reducing the amount
available for reinvestment. Plant expan-
sion and equipment replacement will
suffer.
Although. some of our capital require-
ments come from borrowing, many com-
panies have already reached their maxi-
mum debt capacity. The debt-to-equity
ratio for industrial companies has in-
creased from 25 to over 40 percent in the
last decade-a dangerous overextension
of credit. High interest rates-combined
with a high level of debt-create fixed
charges that cannot be easily absorbed,
especially in an economic turndown.
Additionally, there is growing reluctance
on the part of buyers of industrial bonds
to make long-term commitments during
these inflationary times, even at the cur-
rent record high interest rates.
Lastly, the balance of needed capital
funds has customarily been raised
through the issue of new equity secu-
rities--principally, issuing more stock.
Yet, there has been a substantial decline
in the amount of new equity capital
raised during the past few years. It is
difficult today to float large issues of
equity, except at levels that are not ac-
ceptable either to management or to the
existing shareholders of the company.
Again, capital investment suffers.
Let us examine the capital supply side
for a moment. We find that the rate of
savings in the United States has dropped
to the lowest rate of savings of at1Y de-
veloped country in the free wort . Bil-
lions have flowed from savingF'"institu-
tions and banks, and the nurgiber of in-
dividual shareholders has decreased by
some 1.6 million in the last years alone.
The purchases and sales' of individual
investors now represent Wss than 30 per-
cent of the daily tra on the New
York Stock Exchange, vlth a disturbing
concentration of sh eholder power in
institutions-university endowments,
charities. mutual f*ds, and so forth.
THE PROVISI9 S OF THE BILL
Public and.privAte action is now needed
to reward indivi(teals willing to save and
invest and shift' into construc-
tion of new productive capacity. Our tax
policy must be redirected to remove
onerous burdens from the producer,
which in the long run is the most effec-
tive way to benefit consumers-and we
are all consumers. We must recognize
that a major surge of capital investment
in new and more productive capacity is
absolutely essential if we are to bring
demand-pull Inflation under control.
The proposed Saving and Investment
Act is designed to do this.
What are its principal provisions?
Section 2 increases the current Invest-
ment tax credit from 7 to 15 percent. The
7 percent investment credit has spurred
capital investment over the last decade
despite its on-again off-again history. An
incentive to increase investment in new
plants and equipment will encourage pro-
ductivity and dampen the inflationary
spiral by encouraging increasesin sup-
plies of scarce commodities. It is esti-?
mated that increasing the investment tax
credit to 15 percent would increase capl-
tal outlays above current estimates by $30
billion.
Section 3 increases the allowable range
of useful lives of the asset depreciation
ringe-ADR-from 20 to 40 percent.
Each dollar of today's capital recovery
allowances based on the original cost of
tie existing stock of production facilitI i
is worth only 83 cents in terms of the or-
rant cost of these facilities. This i;dder-
depreciation has led to an overstatement
of profits and an overpayment of taxes
based on those profits. When replacement:
it. necessary, the cost of replacement has
greatly increased due to inflation. This
increased cost of replacement must be
paid for primarily from earnings. The
c::ass life system ADR-has helped to
overcome the repressive nature of our de-
preciation policy. In order to lessen the
e:3ects of inflation on replacement costs,
a shorter period for computing deprecia-
te on should be permitted.
It is estimated that if the ADR is In-
creased to 40 percent, the increase in
capital outlays might well total $76 bil-
lion in additional saving and investment
over 3 years.
Section 4 permits taxpayers to write
off the cost of pollution control facilities
in .the year in which the outlays are
made. Stringent environmental stand-
ards requiring new abatement equipment
have cut Into capital. investment. Abate-
ment equipment generally does not di-
rectly increase productivity or efficiency
of operations nor can the cost of such
facilities bepartially recovered by busi-
ness from higher sales revenues.
Spending for pollution control equip-
ment increased by almost 200 percent
from $1.1 billion in 1968 to over $3 billion
in 1971. It has been estimated that as
much as $300 billion may be needed for
pollution control facilities alone in the
next decade.
A special tax allowance for these costs
it essential if we are to meet the new
demands to clean up the environment.
Section 5 would permit the exclusion
from capital gain taxes the first $1,000
o.i gain each from the sale of securities.
I::ivestment capital traditionally has
come from the savings that individuals
invest in American business by buying
securities. However, because of low stock
prices, unstable economic conditions, and
a Federal tax policy of bias against sav-
ing, investors are staying out of the
stock market.
It is estimated that over the last 2 years
1.6 million individual shareholders have
left the securities market, taking with
1119233-,-
them some $12 billion in potential growth
capital. Unless our tax laws are liberal-
ized to entourage investments, the Na-
tion could fall short of i capital re-
quirements. An annual c ltal gain ex-
clusion would increase a demand for
equities resulting in a rger volume of
transactions in stocks by individuals and
a larger volume of capital gain realiza-
tion.
Section 6 allows Individual taxpayers
a tax credit of 10 percent of up to $2.000
of increases ip their savings held in
specified assets with a limit of $200 per
return-$100`for married taxpayers fil-
ing separatE returns. The credit is limited
to savin ,In the form of savings accounts
in com ercial banks, mutual savings
bank( savings and loan institutions.
creel unions, corporate equities, and
F eral Government debt instruments.
The credit for savings has many
Advantages:
It would, for a great many individuals,
reduce the cost of maintaining or in-
creasing their savings, while increasing
the cost-by the amount of the foregone
tax credit-of reducing their savings to
finance consumption outlays.
It would certainly increase the total
amount of personal saving compared to
the amount which would otherwise be
undertaken.
It would clearly provide some buffer
for individuals against the erosion of
their savings by Inflation.
It would funnel additional funds into
financial intermediaries and reduce pres-
sures on yields in the capital markets. It
would bolster the stock market and pro-
vide support to the bond market. It would
significantly ease the situation of mort-
gage lenders.
It would serve as a first step toward
placing saving on a more nearly equal
footing with consumption under the in-
come tax and contribute to reducing the
cost of capital, hence to increasing the
rate of private capital formation, pro-
ductivity, and real wage rates.
THE BILL SHOULD BECOME LAW
It is clear that our future needs for
savings and investment represent an
enormous challenge far beyond what is
normal for the American economy.
But, this additional savings and in-
vestment is requisite to needed, addi-
tional capital formation. It will help
solve a great share of our economic
problems, for it deals with their root
causes. I suggest it is far better than
trying makeshift policies and laws which
address themselves only to the ever-
changing results of our basic economic
problems.
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES SHOULD
HAVE PAY INCREASE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from Ohio (Mr. WHALEN) is recog-
nized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WHALEN. Mr. Speaker, the Direc-
tor of the Office of Management and
Budget and the Chairman of the Civil
Service Commission have recommended
that Federal workers receive a 5.5-per-
cent pay Increase, effective October 1.
Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
 Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
'September 12, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
ROBERT LAGOMARSINO, JOHN ROUSSELOT,
KEITH SEBELIVS, and CHARLES THONE.
Each Member contributed fully and
directly to the preparation of a specific
section of the report, and had a hand in
the report's total preparation. My fel-
low Republican colleagues and the entire
House can be proud of their efforts and of
their product. They have made a valu-
able contribution to our legislative proc-
ess, and if the recommendations are im-
plemented, to our quality of life.
I commend the report to my colleagues,
and include its covering letter from
Congressman Lou FREY, chairman of the
Republican Research Committee, for
your attention and consideration.
REPUBLICAN RESEARCH COMMITTEE,
Republican Conference,. U.S. House of
Representatives, Washington, D.C,
August 21, 1974.
DEAR REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUE: Attached are
the recommendations of the Task Force on
Privacy, chaired by Barry M. Goldwater, Jr,
and Vice-chaired by Alan Steelman and Ten-
nyson Guyer. Other Members of the Task
Force are John Conlan, Charles Thone, Jack
Kemp, Peggy Heckler, Andrew Hinshaw,
Frank Horton, Charles Mosher, Bob Lago-
marsino, John Rousselot, and Keith Sebelius.
These recommendations are a landmark in
the area of individual rights. Nowhere has
the total question of privacy been so well or
thoughtfully covered. Nowhere has the hu-
man equation in our technological society
been so strongly expressed.
The Research Committee is proud to have
approved this report. These recommenda-
tions and the follow-up legislative efforts will
ensure that the 1984 envisioned by George Or-
well will remain only fictional.
The Task Force and its staff, especially Joe
Overton, are to be commended for the time,
effort an excellence of the product.
Most sincerely,
Lou FREY, Jr.
HOUSE REPUBLICAN RESEARCH COMMITTEE:
RECOMMENDATIONS OF PRIVACY TASK FORCE,
AUGUST 21, 1974
The House Republican Research Commit-
tee has approved the following recommenda-
tions of the Task Force on Privacy which deal
with the following areas:
Government surveillance, Federal informa-
tion collection, social security numbers/
standard universal identifiers, census in-
formation, financial information, consumer
reporting, school records, juvenile records,
arrest records, medical records, computer
data banks, and code of ethics.
The House Republican Task Force on Pri-
vacy believes that the right to privacy is
an issue of paramount concern to the nation,
the public and the Congress. Recently pub-
licized incidents of abuses have begun to
focus attention on this long neglected area.
Public awareness must be heightened and
the legislative process geared up to address
the full range of problems posed by the issue.
Modern technology has greatly increased
the quantity and detail of personal informa-
tion collection, maintenance, storage, uti-
lization and dissemination. The individual
has been physically by-passed in the modern
information process. An atmosphere exists
in which the individual, in exchange for the
benefit or service he obtained, is assumed
to waive any and all interest and control
over the information collected about him. On
the technical and managerial levels, the basic
criteria in many decisions relating to per-
sonal information practices are considera-
tions of technological feasibility, cost-bene-
fit and conveniences. The right to privacy
has been made subservient to concerns for
expediency, utility and pragmatism.
H 9235
The trend in personal information prac- awareness of personal privacy must be merged
flees shows no signs of abating. Twice as with the traditional activities of the free
many computer systems and seven times as marketplace, the role of government as a
many terminals-particularly remote fermi- public servant, and the need for national se-
nals-will be in use by 1984 as are in use to- curity, national defense, and foreign affairs.
day. And, with each federal service program
that is initiated or expanded, there is a geo-
metrically proportionate increase in the
quantity and detail of personal information
sought by the bureaucracy. The theory is
that the broader the information base, the
more efficient and successful the adminis-
tration of the program.
Such a situation demands the attention of
Congress and of the American public. The
computer does not by definition mean injury
to individuals. Its presence has greatly con-
tributed to the American economy and the
ability of government to serve the people.
Under present procedures, however, the
American citizen does not have a clearly de-
fined right to find out what information is
being collected, to see such information, to
correct errors contained in it, or to seek legal
redress for its misuse, Simply put, the citi-
zen must continue to give out large quanti-
ties of information but cannot protect him-
self or herself from its misappropriation,
misapplication or misuse. Both government
and private enterprise need direction, be-
cause many of their practices and policies
have developed on an isolated, ad hoc basis.
The House Republican Task Force on
Privacy has investigated the following gen-
eral areas involving the investigation and
recording of personal activities and infor-
mation: government surveillance, federal in-
formation collection, social security numbers
and universal identifiers, census information,
bank secrecy, consumer reporting, school rec-
ords, juvenile records, arrest records, medical
records, and computer data banks. These in-
quiies have resulted in the development of
general suggestions for legislative remedies.
Each statement is accompanied by a set of
findings.
All findings and recommendations are pre-
sented with the intent of being consistent
with these general principles:
1. there should be no personal information
system whose existence is secret;
2. information should not be collected un-
less the need for it has been clearly estab-
lished in advance;
3. information should be appropriate and
relevant to the purpose for which it has been
collected;
4. information should not be obtained by
illegal, fraudulent, or unfair means;
5. information should not be used unless
it is accurate and current;
6. procedures should be established so that
an individual knows what information is
stored, the purpose for which it has been
recorded, particulars about its use and dis-
semination, and has the right to examine
that information;
7. there should be a clearly prescribed pro-
cedure for an individual to correct, erase
or amend inaccurate, obsolete, or irrelevant
information;
8. any organization collecting, maintain-
ing, using, or disseminating personal infor-
mation should assure its reliability and take
precautions to prevent its misuse;
9. there should be a clearly prescribed
procedure for an individual to prevent per-
sonal information collected for one purpose
from being used for another purpose without
his consent;
10. the Federal Government should not
collect personal information except as ex-
pressly authorized by law; and
11. that these basic principles apply to
both governmental and non-governmental
activities.
Each recommendation of the Task Force
seeks to contribute to a broader, more intel-
ligent, viable understanding of the need for
a renewed concern for personal privacy. An
SURVEILLANCE
The Task Force is deeply disturbed by the
increasing incidence of unregulated, clan-
destine government surveillance based solely
on administrative or executive authority.
Examples of such abuses include wiretapping,
bugging, photographing, opening mail,
examining confidential records and other-
wise intercepting private communications
and monitoring private activities. Surveil-
lance at the federal level receives the most
publicity. However, state and local govern-
ment, military intelligence and police activi-
ties also must be regulated.
The Fourth Amendment of the Constitu-
tion clearly specifies "the right of the people
to be secure in their persons, houses, papers
and effects, against unreasonable searches
and seizures." The First Amendment guards
against abridgement of the rights of free
speech, free press, and assembly for political
purposes. The Fourteenth Amendment states
that none of a citizen's rights may be taken
from him by governmental action without
the due process of law.
The direct threat to individual civil lib-
erties is obvious in those cases in which a
person is actually being monitored, but even
more alarming is the "chilling effect" such
activities have on all citizens. A person who
fears that he will be monitored may, either
subconsciously or consciously, fail to fully
exercise his constitutionally guaranteed lib-
erties. The mere existence of such fear erodes
basic freedoms and cannot be accepted in a
democratic society.
The various abuses of discretionary au-
thority in the conduct of surveillance pro-
vide ample evidence that current safeguard
mechanisms do not work. Procedures allow-
ing the executive branch to determine wheth-
er a surveillance activity is proper or not
pose certain conflict of interest questions.
A degree of controversy surrounds the
question of the authority of the President
to initiate electronic surveillance without the
safeguards afforded by court review. Present
law is clear on this point: the Omnibus Crime
Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 lists
those specific crimes in connection with
which electronic monitoring may be insti-
tuted and requires that court approval be
obtained in these cases. However, dispute
has arisen over Executive claims of Con-
stitutional prerogatives to implement wire-
taps for national security purposes. The Su-
preme Court has ruled that, if such prerog-_
ative exists, it does not apply to cases of
domestic surveillance unrelated to national
security. The Court has not yet ruled -on the
constitutionality of national security wire-
taps unauthorized by a court. Cases are
pending before the courts at this time which
raise this issue. The Task Force agrees with
the movement of the Judiciary to circum-
scribe unauthorized wiretaps and hopes it
will proceed in this direction.
The Task Force feels that surveillance is so
repugnant to the right to individual privacy
and due process that its use should be con-
fined to exceptional circumstances. The Task
Force further feels that no agent of federal,
state, or local government should be per-
mitted to conduct any form of surveillance,
including wiretapping of U.S. citizens in na-
tional security cases, without having demon-
strated probable cause and without having
obtained the approval of a court of competent
jurisdiction. The Task Force recommends en-
actment of new legislation to prohibit the
unauthorized surveillance by any means, and
further recommends that existing laws be
clarified to the extent this may be necessary
to ensure that no agent of the government,
for any reason, shall have the authority to.
Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
 Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
11 9236 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - IIOUSE September 12, 1974
conduct any surveillance on any American against unauthorized use has not yet been serving a warrant or showing probable cause.
citizen for any reason without first obtaining adequately researched and developed. A toss, The Act's compulsory recordkeeping require-
a court order, leak or theft would seriously compromize a ments, by allowing the recording of almost
The Task Force believes that this proposal system and official misappropriation could all significant transactions, convert private
would not lessen the capability of the gov- become a political threat. T)ne following Con- financial dealings into the personal property
ernment to protect and defend the American gressional action is needed: of the banks. The banks become the collec-
people, but would go a long way toward as- 1. legislation should be enacted that sets tors and custodians of financial records
curing the individual citizen that his con- guidelines for use of the SSN by limiting it which, when improperly used, enable an in-
stitutional rights will not be abridged by to the operation of old-age, survivors, and dividual's entire life style to be tracked
government without due process of law. disability insurance programs or as required clown.
FEDERAL INFORMATION COLLECTION by federal law; The general language of the Act allowed
Recently, there has been a pronounced in- 2. any Executive Orders authorizing fed- bureaucrats to ignore the intent of the law
crease in federal data and Information col- eral agencies to use SSN's should be repeated, and neglect to institute adequate privacy
lection. Over 11.5 million cubic feet of rec- or alternatively, reevaluated and modified; safeguards. The Supreme Court affirmed this
ords were stored in Federal Records Centers 3. legislation should be enacted restricting approach by upholding the constitutionality
at s,he beginning of FY 1973. Accompanying the use of the SSN to well-defined uses, and of both the law and the bureaucratic misin-
thi:s increase has been a rise in the potential prohibiting the development and use of any terpretation of it.
for abuse of federal information collection type of SUI until the technical state of she Congress must now take action to prevent
systems. computer can ensure the security of such a the unwarranted invasion of privacy by pre-
The Federal Reports Act of 1942 was en- system. At that time, a SUI system should scribing specific procedures and standards
acted to protect individuals from overly bur- have limited applicability and should be de- governing the disclosure of financial infor-
densome and repetitive reporting require- veloped only after a full congressional in- mation by financial institutions to Federal
meats. The agency entrusted with the -re- vestigation and mandate; and officials or agencies. Congress must enact
sponsibility for implementing the Act has 4. new government programs should be legislation to assure that the disclosure of a
ignored the legislative mandate and failed to prohibited from incorporating the use of the customer's records will occur only if the
hold a single hearing or conduct any investi- SSN or other possible SUI. Existing programs customer specifically authorizes a disclosure
gations. With the exception of the Bureau of using the SSN without specific authorization or if the financial institution is served with
the Census and the Internal Revenue Service, by law must be required to phase out their a. court order directing it to comply. Legisla-
there are few restrictions on the collection use of the SSN. State and local governmental tion must specify that legal safeguards be
or dissemination of confidential information agencies, as well as the private sector, should provided requiring that the customer be
compiled by federal agencies. follow this same course of action. properly notified and be provided legal means
The Task Force recommends that the Office A review should be conducted of the Tn- of challenging the subpoena or summons.
of Management and Budget immediately be- ternal Revenue Service in both its collection Passage of such legislation would be an
gin a thorough review and examination of and dissemination policies. Leaks must be Important step forward in reaffirming the
ale approved government forms and eliminate ended. The need for stricter penalties for Individual's right to privacy.
all repetitive and unnecessary information unauthorized activities should be reviewed. CONSUMER REPORTING
requirements. CENSUS BUREAU The consumer reporting industry, through
Legislation setting down clear guidelines The greatest personal . data collection its network of credit bureaus, investigative
and spelling out restrictions is needed to pro- agency is the Bureau of Census. Created to agencies, and other reporting entities is in
feet the individual from unrestricted and un- count the people in order to determine con- growing conflict with individual privacy.
controlled information collection. Individ- gressonal districts, this agency has mush- Most Americans eventually will be the
uals asked to provide information must be roomed into a vast information center which subject of a consumer report as -a result of
apprised of its intended uses. Individuals
supplying information which will be made generates about 500,000 pages of numbers applying for credit, insurance, or employ-
public must be notified of that fact at the and charts each year. ment. The problem is one of balancing the
Under penalty of law, the citizen is forced legitimate needs of business with the basic
time the information is collected or re- to divulge intimate, personal facts surround- rights of the Individual.
quested. Public disclosure (including dis- lag his public and private life and that of Consumer reports fall into two categoires.
semination on an intra- or inter-agency the entire family. These answers provide a First, there are the familiar which contain
basis) of financial or other personal infor- substantial personal dossier on each Amer- "factual" information on an individual's
mation must be prohibited to protect the scan citizen. The strictest care must be taken credit record such as where accounts are held
privacy of respondents. to protect the confidentiality of these records and how promptlybills are paid. 100 million
SSN/SUI and ensure that the in * ? ?. consumer reportsare produced each year by
Returning the use of the Social Security The Census Bureau sells parts of its col- some 2600 credit bureaus.
Number (SSN) to its intended purpose (i.e. lected data to anyone who wishes to purchase The second ones go beyond factual infor-
operation of old-age, survivors, and disability such information. Included are all types of mation to include subjective opinions of the
insurance programs) is a necessary corollary statistical data tha are available on popu- individual's chacater, general reputation,
to safeguarding the right of privacy and cur- lation and housing characteristics. As the personal characteristics, and mode of living.
tailing illegal or excessive information col- questions become more detailed and exten- These are often obtained through interviews
lection. save, broad-scale dissemination becomes more with neighbors, friends, ex-spouses and
The use of the Social Security Number has threatening, and frightening. When used in former employers or employees. An esti-
proliferated to many general items including combination with phone directories, drivers' mated 30 to 40 million such reports are pro-
str,te driver licenses, Congressional, school licenses and street directories, census data duced annually.
and employment identification cards, credit may enable any one Interested to identify The first Federal attempt at regulating the
cards and credit investigation reports, tax- an individual. Therefore, It is vitally impor- collection and reporting of Information on
payer identification, military service num- tant that rules and regulations governing the consumers by third-party agencies came in
bees. welfare and social services program re- access to and dissemination of this collected 1970 with the enactment of the Fair Credit
cipients, state voter registration, insurance data be reviewed, clarified and strengthened. Reporting Act (FCRA). In theory, the Act
policies and records and group health rec- Legislation is needed to guarantee the coil- had three main objectives: to enable con-
ords. fidentiality of individual Information by ex- sumers to correct Inaccurate and misleading
There are serious problems associated with panding the scope of confidentiality under reports; to preserve the confidentiality of the
the use of the SSN as a standard uiversal existing law and by increasing the severity information; and to protect the individual's
number to identify individuals. A standard of punishment for divulging confidential in- right to privacy.
universal identifier (SUI) will relegate in- formation. These provisions should be spe- The specific safeguards provided by the
dividuals to a number; thereby, increasing eifically directed at the officers and employees FCRA are: A consumer adversely affected
feelings of alienation. The SSN's growing of the Bureau of Census, all officers and ern- because of information contained in a con-
use as an identifier and filing number is Ployees of the Federal government and pri_ sumer report must be so notified and given
already having a negative, dehumanizingef- vate citizens who wrongfully acquire such in- the identity of the reporting agency. The
feet upon many citizens. In addition, the formation. In addition, the Bureau of the consumer is entitled to an oral disclosure of
use of a SUI by all types of organizations en- Census must use all available technological the information contained in his file and the
ables the linking of records and the track- sophistication to assure that individuals can- Identity of its recipients. Items disputed by
ing of an individual from cradle to grave. not be inductively identified. the consumer must be deleted if the infor-
This possibility would negate the right to FINANCIAL INFORMATION mation cannnot be reconfirmed. The con-
m ke a "fresh start", the ri ht of anonymity, may have his version of any disputed
g ht On October 26, 1970, sweeping legislati.:,n item entered in his file and included in sub-
and the right to be left alone, with no com- known as the Bank Secrecy Act became law. sequent reports.
pensating benefit. The Act's intention was to reduce white col- The FCRA needs to be strengthened in
A well-developed SUI system would require lar crime by making records more accessible two major areas: disclosure requirements
a huge, complex bureaucratic apparatus to to law enforcement officials. However, in ac- and investigative reports. The individual
control it and demand a strict system of complishing its purpose, it allowed federal should be entitled to actually see and in-
professional ethics for information techni- agencies to seize and secure certain financial spect his file, rather than rely on an oral
cians. The technology needed to protect papers and effects of bank customers without presentation. Further, he should be allowed
Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
 Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76MOD527ROO0700140101-6
,September 12, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
to obtain a copy of it by mail (the consumer
is often geographically distant from the
source of the file). Users of consumer reports
should be required to specifically identify
the information which triggered any adverse
action.
The FCRA protects the sources used in
investigative reports. The Task Force be-
lieves that this is contrary to the basic tenets
of our system of justice and that the in-
formation source must be revealed upon the
subject's request. Furthermore, the Task
Force recommends that -advance written
authorization be required from any individ-
ual who is the subject of an investigative
report for any purpose.
SCHOOL RECORDS
The recent increase in popular awareness
of the seriousness of the privacy issue has
been accompanied by an increase in the gen-
eral concern over loose, unstructured and
unsupervised school recordkeeping systems
and associated administrative practices.
There has also been general discussion about
what information should be kept on a child
and considered part of his or her "record".
Parents are frequently denied access to their
own child's record, or are 'prohibited from
challenging incorrect or misleading informa-
tion contained in his file. At the same. time,
incidents of highly personal data being in-
discriminately disseminated to inquirers un-
connected with the school system are not
uncommon.
Remedial measures are available to the
Congress in the form of legislative actions.
The sanctions under which such provisions
would operate, however, are the key to their
effectiveness. The Task Force proposes the
Congress adopts as a general policy the rule
that federal funds be withheld from any
state or local educational agency or institu-
tion which has the policy of preventing par-
ents from inspecting, reviewing, and chal-
lenging the content of his or her child's
school record, Outside access to these school
records must be limited so that protection
of the student's right to privacy is ensured.
It is recommended that the release of such
identifiable personal data outside the school
system be contingent upon the written con-
sent of the parents or court order.
All persons, agencies, or organizations de-
siring access to the records of a student must
complete a written form indicating the spe-
cific educational need for the information.
This information shall be kept permanently
with the file of the student for inspection by
parents of students only and transferred to
a third party only with written consent of
the parents. Personal data should be made
available for basic or applied research only
when adequate safeguards have been estab-
lished to protect the students' and families'
rights of privacy.
Whenever a student has attained eighteen
years of age, the permission or consent re-
quired of and the rights accorded to the
parents should be conferred and passed to
the student.
Finally, the Secretary of HEW should es-
tablish or designate an office and review
board within HEW for the purpose of inves-
tigating, processing, reviewing, and adjudi-
cating violations of the provisions set forth
by the Congress.
JUVENILE RECORDS
The Task Force supports the basic phi-
losophy underlying the existence of a sepa-
rate court system for juvenile offenders,
which is to avoid the stigmatizing effect of
a criminal procedure. The lack of confiden-
tiality of such proceedings and accompany-
ing records subverts this intent and violates
the individual's basic right of privacy.
Most states have enacted laws to provide
confidentiality. Yet the Task Force finds
that due to a lack of specific legislation, and
contrary to the intent of the juvenile jus-
ties system, the individual's 'right of privacy
is often routinely violated. Juvenile records
are routinely released to the military, civil
service, and often to private employers as
well. This occurs in cases in which the hear-
ing involves non-criminal charges, in cases of
arrest but no court action, in cases in which
the 'individual is no longer under the juris-
diction of the juvenile court, and in cases
where his file has been administratively
closed.
. Legislation governing the confidentiality
of juvenile court and police records varies
widely from state to state. Only 24 states
control and limit access to police records,
therefore enabling a potential employer who
is refused access to court records to obtain
the information from the police. Only 16
states have expungment laws providing for
the destruction of such records after a spe-
cified period of good behavior. Only 6 states
make it a crime to improperly disclose juv-
enile record information. And, one state,
Iowa, in fact provides that juvenile records
must be open to the public for inspection.
The Task Force finds that even in those
states whose laws provide adequate protec-
tion, actual practices are often inconsistent
with legislation.
Many new questions about confidentiality,
privacy and juvenile rights are being raised,
and the Task Force finds that the establish-
ment of safeguards has lagged significantly
behind technological developments. For ex-
ample, presently no state has enacted legis-
lation regulating the use of computers in
juvenile court; as a rule, each system estab-
lishes its own guidelines for data collection,
retention, and distribution.
The Task Force finds that with the use
of computers, the juvenile's right to privacy
is additionally threatened by the increased
accessibility to his record and therefore in-
creased possibility of misuse. Staff careless-
ness, less than strict adherence to rules of
limited access, and electronic sabotage must
now be added to the existing threats to the
juvenile's right to privacy.
The Task Force recommends the establish-
ment of minimum federal standards for
state laws to include the following provi-
sions:
1, all records of the juvenile court and all
police records concerning a juvenile shall be
considered confidential and shall . not be
made public. Access to these records shall
be limited to those officials directly con-
nected with the-child's treatment, welfare,
and rehabilitation;
2. dissemination of juvenile records, or di-
vulgence of that information for employ-
ment, licensing, or any other purpose in vio-
lation of statutory provisions shall be sub-
ject to a criminal penalty;
3. to protect the reformed delinquent from
stigma continuing into his adult life, provi-
sions should specify a procedure for either
the total destruction or the sealing of all
juvenile court and police investigative and
offender records at the time the youth
reaches his majority, or when two years have
elapsed since he has been discharged from
the custody or supervision of the court. Sub-
sequent to this expungement, all proceed-
ings and records should be treated as though
they had never occurred and the youth
should reply as such to any Inquiry con-
cerning his juvenile record; and
4. all police records on juveniles arrested
but where no court action was taken should
be systematically destroyed when the inci-
dent is no longer under active investigation.
The Task Force recommends the enact-
ment of legislation specifically prohibiting
federal agencies from requesting information
relating to juvenile record expungement from
employment applicants or from requesting
such information from the courts or the
police.
The Task Force further recommends the
cessation of all federal funding for com-
H 9237
puterized systems which contain juvenile
records unless it can be demonstrated that
these systems provide adequate safeguards
for the protection of the juvenile's right of
privacy. These standards must fulfill all the
requirements of the minimum standards for
state legislation previously enumerated, in-
cluding special provisions to strictly limit
data accessibility.
ARREST RECORDS
A large percentage of arrests never result
in conviction. Yet, in over half the states,
individual's arrest records are open to public
inspection, subjecting innocent parties to
undue stigma, harassment, and discrimina-
tion.
Persons with arrest records often find it
difficult, if not impossible to secure employ-
ment or licenses. A study of employment
agencies in the New York City area found
that seventy-five percent would not make a
referral for any applicant with an arrest rec-
ord. This was true even in cases in which the
arrest was not followed by a trial and convic-
tion. This is just one example of the wide-
spread practice of "presumption of guilt"
based on the existence of an arrest record.
The Task Force holds that release of in-
formation about arrests not followed by con-
viction is a direct violation of the individ-
ual's right of privacy. It therefore recom-
mends that legislative efforts be directed
toward:
1, establishing minimum standards for
state laws calling for the automatic sealing
of all individual arrest records which were
not followed by conviction and which are
no longer under active investigation;
2. requiring the FBI to seal arrest records
not followed by conviction; and
3. prohibiting inclusion of arrest records
not followed by conviction on computerized
systems involving -more than one state or
using federal funds.
MEDICAL RECORDS
Medical records, which contain sensitive
and personal information, are especially in
need of privacy safeguards to maintain basic
trust in the doctor-patient relationship. Yet,
development of automated data processing
systems has enhanced the ability of govern-
ment and private organizations to store, ana-
lyze and transfer medical records. Increas-
ingly, this occurs without the individual's
knowledge or consent. Abuse of such infor-
mation systems can have a deleterious effect
on doctor-patient relations.
To guarantee the privacy of medical rec-
ords, the Task Force recommends that:
1. the Federal government provide dol-
lar grants and incentives to States for the
voluntary adoption and execution of State
plans to insure the right to privacy for com-
puterized medical information systems. Such
a plan would place principal responsibility
on the States, giving the federal government
the right to set minimum standards;
2. Congress - review the recently enacted
Professional Standards Reviews Organizations
(PSRO) legislation. There, are increasing
numbers of reports and complaints regard-
ing Review Board uses of medical files and
the threat this poses to privileged, confiden-
tial doctor-patient relationships; and
3. provisions be included in national health
insurance legislation which specifically en-
sure the individual's privacy. The institu-
tion of a national health insurance plan will
create a vast medical information network
which will require stringent safeguards to
prevent abuses of the patients' right to
privacy.
COMPUTER DATA BANKS
The use of the computer has brought great
commercial and social benefits to modern
America. Greater reliance on the computer,
however, increases its integration into all
aspects of daily life. The result is increased
vulnerability to abuse or misuse bf comput-
erized information.
Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
 IT 9238
'Phe Task Force finds that the individual
possesses inadequate remedies for the correc-
ticn of such abuses. In fact, the Task Force
considers it probable that many abuses have
,,one unreported simply because the individ-
ual involved did not know of the data being
collected about him.
:even If the individual is aware that data is
be:.ng collected about him, he faces several
obstacles if he wishes to expunge purely pri-
va:e information or to correct erroneous in-
Among his obstacles are the fol-
locving: the lack of statutory support for
legal action (except in the credit reporting
areal, the cost of litigation, and even fear of
retaliation by the company or agency being
challenged.
Despite their potential for abuse, data
banks remain an inescapable fact of life in
a society growing more complex and more
technological. The Task Force does not op-
pose data banks as such, but favors strong
safeguards against their misuse, and rec-
ommends that:
1. Rights under the Fair Credit Reporting
Ac', of 1970 be extended to all data collection.
The individual must have and be informed
of his right to review information contained
in any collection of data about himself (ex-
cluding national security and criminal jus-
tice files) ;
2. Congress establish categories (i.e. In-
depth biographical, financial, medical, etc.)
of information which may not be included
in reports on an individual unless the in-
dividual knowingly gives his uncoerced con-
sent:
3. limited exceptions be granted for na-
tiona1 security and criminal justice invest-
gations;
4. criminal and civil penalties be estab-
lished for any use of statistical data (col-
lected for collective analysis) to wrongfully
acquire information on individuals;
5. transfer of personal information be-
tween governmental agencies be strictly
limited;
6. the creation of a centralized Federal
data bank (except for national security and
criminal justice purposes) be prohibited; and
7. a federal "privacy protection agency" be
established to enforce the proposed legis-
lation.
CODE OF ETHICS AND STANDARD OF CONDUCT
The Republican Task Force on Privacy be-
lieves there to be a definite need for the
development of a universal code of ethics and
standard of conduct for the technical, mana-
ger;al and academic personnel involved in
the development and use of personal in-
formation systems. The Task Force regards
this to be essential for the automated and
computerized information systems. Personal
information systems are becoming an in-
tegral aspect of the daily life of every in-
dividual in our society. This sensitive rela-
tionship demands and merits the develop-
ment of an attitude of professionalism. It is
recognized that some efforts have been made
to develop and foster such attitudes. But, the
information industry as a whole has not sup-
porsed such efforts as a matter of policy. The
Task Force declares its commitment to the
development of a professional standard of
conduct and code of ethics for the persons
involved in the development, maintenance,
management and use of personal informa-
tion systems.
CONCLUSION
The Task Force is aware that this is a rela-
tively new area of concern. Some recom-
mendations may go too far and some not
far enough. Some areas may have been over-
looked. But there is no question that now is
the time to address ourselves to this im-
portant and far reaching Issue. If we fail--
Gecrge Orwell's 1984 may become a reality
by 1976.
Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE September 12, 1974
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Breckenridge, Adam Carlyle, The right to
privacy. Lincoln, University of Nebraska
Press, 1970.
Canada. Department of Communication
and the Department of Justice. Privacy and
computers. A report of a task force estab-
lished jointly by the Canadian Department
of Communication and the Department of
Justice. Ottawa, Canada, Information Can-
ada, 1972.
Campaign, Howard and Lance J. Hoffman.
Computer privacy and security. Computers
and automation, v. 22, July 1973.
Cashman, Charles E. Confidentiality of .u-
venue court proceedings: A review. Juvenile
Justice, v. 24, August 1973.
Cohen, Richard E. Justice report/hearings
focus on privacy, limitations on use of FBI
data. National journal reports, Feb. 16, 1974.
Computer applications in the juvenile jus-
tice system, National Council of Juvenile.
Court Judges, 1974.
Countryman, Vern. The diminishing right
of privacy: The personal dossier and the com-
puter. Texas Law Review, May 1971.
Curran, William J., et al. Protection of pri-
vacy and confidentiality. Science, v. 182, Nov.
23, 1973.
De Weese, J. Taylor. Giving the compueer
a conscience. Harper's, Nov. 1973.
Gotlieb, Calvin. Regulations for informa-
tion systems. Computers and automation, v.
19, Sept. 1970.
Gough, Aldan A. The expungement of ad-
judication records. Washington University
Law Quarterly, 1966.
Hunt, M. K. and Rein Turn. Privacy and s-
eurity in data bank systems: an annotated
bibliography. 1969-1973. R--1044-NSF. Sar a
Monica, Calif., Rand Corp., 1974.
Hoffman, Lance J. Security and privacy in
computer systems. Los Angeles, Calif, 1973.
Hoglund and Kahan, Invasion of priva"y
and the freedom of information act; Gem in
v. NLRB, 40 Geo Washington Law Review,
1972.
Koehn, E. Hank. Privacy, our problem S.;r
tomorrow. Journal of systems management,
v. 24, July 1973.
Kraning, Alan. Wanted: new ethics for new
techniques. Technology review, v. 70, Mar.
1970.
Kuhn, David. Your life: how private? R.^-
print from Minneapolis Tribune, Oct. 7-32,
1973 by the Project on Privacy and Data Cci-
lection of the American Civil Liberties Union
Foundation. Washington, D.C.
Lapidus, Edith J. Eavesdropping on trial.
Rochelle Park, New Jersey, Hayden Book C r,,.,
1974.
Levin, Eugene. The, future shock of infor-
mation networks, Astronautics and aerona+-
tics, Nov. 1973.
Lusky Louis. Invasion of privacy: a clari-
fication of concepts. Columbia Law Review,
72.
Miller, Arthur R. The assault on privacy:
computers, databanks, and dosseirs. Ann
Arbor. University of Michigan Press, 1971.
Miller, Herbert S. The closed door. U.3.
Dept. of Labor, 1972.
National Committe for Citizens in Educa-
tion. Children, parents and school records.
Columbia, Md., National Committee for Citi-
zens in. Education, 1974.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development. Toward central govern-
went computer policies. OECO Information
Studies, 1973.
Pennock, J. Roland and John W. Chap-
man, Privacy. New York, Atherton Press, 1971.
Privacy in the First Amendment. The Yale
Law Journal, June 1973.
Project Search Staff. Committee on Secu-
rity and Privacy. Security and privacy con-
siderations In criminal history information
systems. Technical Report No. 2. Sacrament?,
Calif., Project Search. California Crime Tech-
nological Research Foundation, July 1970.
Ralston, Anthony G: Computers and demo-
cracy, Computers and automation, V. 22, April
1973.
Reed, Irving S. The application of informa-
tion theory to privacy in data banks. Santa
Monica, Calif., Rand Corp.,_ 1973.
Rule, James B. Private lives and public sur-
veillance. London, Allen Lane, 1973.
Sargent, Francis W. Centralized data
bank-where public technology can go
wrong. Astronautics and aeronautics, v. 11,
Nov. 1973.
Schrag, Peter. Dossier dictatorship. Satur-
day Review, April 17, 1971.
Social Security Administration. Social
Security Number Task Force: Report to the
Commissioner. Department of Health, Edu-
cation and Welfare, 1971.
Springer, Eric W. Automated medical rec-
ords and the law. Pittsburgh, Aspen Systems
Corporation, 1971.
Stone, Michael and Malcolm Warner. The
data bank society: organizations, computers,
and social freedom. London, George Allen and
Unwln LTD, 1970.
Thomas, Uwe. Computerized data banks in
public administration, Paris, France, Orga-
nization for Economic Co-operation and De-
velopment, 1971.
Turn, Rein. Privacy and security in per-
sonal information databank systems. Pre-
pared for the National Science Foundation.
R-1044-NSF. March 1974. Santa Monica-,
Calif., Rand Corp., 1974.
U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Gov-
ernment Operations. Federal information sys-
tems and plans-Federal use and develop-
ment of advanced technology. Hearings be-
fore the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations
and Government Information. 93rd Cong. 1st
and 2d session, Washington, U.S. Govt. Print-
ing Office, 1973, 1974.
U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on the
Judiciary. Federal data banks, computers and
the Bill of Rights. Hearings before the Sub-
committee on Constitutional Rights. 92nd
Gong. 1st session, Washington, U.S. Govt.
Printing Office, 1971.
U.S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare. Secretary's Advisory Committee on
Automated Personal Data Systems. Records,
computers, and the rights of citizens. Wash-
ington, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, 1973.
Westin, Alan F. and Michael A. Baker. Data
banks in a free society; computers, record-
keeping, and privacy. Report of the Project
on Computer Databanks of the Computer
Science and Engineering Board. National
Academy of Science. New York, Quadrangle
Books, 1972.
Wheeler, Stanton. On record: -files and dos-
siers in american life. New York, Russell Sage
Foundation, 1989.
1974 CONVENTION ACTIONS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. U er a
previous order of the House, thee ntle-
man from Pennsylvania (Mr. FfflOD) is
recognized for 10 minutes.
Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Speaker,- a stoning
attack on the U.S. Embass in Panama
City, Republic of Panama n August 14,
1974, by a mob of riot' students dis-
playing signs of the N94 anal Institution
Student Revolution Front, followed
by the decision of ^e present Revolu-
tionary Governor t of Panama to re-
new its diplomatte relations with Soviet
Cuba, has again attracted world atten-
tion to the danger zone of the Caribbean,
particularly the Panama Canal. In the
Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
 S 17664
Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE September
surveillance activities related to the defense (c) The expenses of the joint committee
or national security of the United States shall be paid from the contingent fund of
conducted within the territorial boundaries the Senate from funds appropriated for the
of the United States citizens. For purposes joint committee, upon vouchers signed by the
of this subsection, lawful investigative or chairman of the joint committee or by any
surveillance activities related to the defense member of the joint committee authorized
or national security of the United States by the chairman.
means: investigative or surveillance activi- (d) Members of the joint committee, and
ties carried on by duly authorized agencies its personnel, experts, and consultants, while
to obtain information concerning unlawful traveling on official business for the joint
I activities directed against the Government of committee within or outside the United
the United States which are substantially States, may receive either the per diem allow-
financed by, directed by, sponsored by, or ance authorized to be paid to Members of
I oti}.erwise involving the direct collaboration the Congress or its employees, or their ac,
of o i n owers. tual and necessary expenses if an itemized
g p
t
tement ?f sucti. ex
enses is attached to
a
p
s
r
he
ommittee, or any subcommittee there- "(e) (1)
. District Court of the United
The
risdiction to examine any activities of States for the District of Columbia shall
ies and departments of the United have original irisdiction
without regard to
,
territorial boundaries of the United States. versy, of any civil action heretofore or here-
SEC. 403. In carrying out its functions, the force or secure a declaration concerning the
joint committee shall, at least once each validity of any subpena heretofore or here-
year, receive the testimony, under oath, of .% after issued by such joint committee, and
representative of every department and the said District Court shall have jurisdic-
agency of the Federal government which en- tion to enter any such judgment or decree
gages in investigations or surveillance of in- in any such civil action as may be neces-
dividuals, such testimony to relate to the sary or appropriate to enforce obedience to
full scope and nature of the respective any such subpena.
agency's or department's investigations or (2) The joint committee shall have au-
surveillance of individuals, subject to the thority to prosecute in Its own name or in
exceptions provided for in subsections 402 the name of the United States in the District
(a) (3) and 402 (b). Court of the United States for the District of
POWERS Columbia any civil action heretofore or
hereafter brought by the joint committee to
SEC. 404. (a) The joint committee, or any enforce or secure a declaration concerning
subcommittee thereof, is authorized, in its the validity of any subpena heretofore or
discretion (1) to make expenditures, (2) to hereafter issued by such committee, and pray
employ personnel, (3) to adopt rules respect- the said District Court to enter such judg-
ing its organization and procedures, (4) to ment or decree in said civil action as may
hold hearings, (5) to sit and act at any time be necessary or appropriate to enforce any
or place, (6) to subpena witnesses and docu- such subpena.
ments, (7) with the prior consent of the (3) The joint committee may be represent-
agency concerned, to use on a reimbursable ed by such attorneys as it may designate in
basis the services of personnel, information, any action prosecuted by such committee.un-
and facilities of any such agency, (8) to pro- der this title.
cure printing and binding, (9) to procure On page 3, line 23, after "Act", insert
the temporary services (not in excess of one "(other than title IV) ".
year) or intermittent services of Individual On page 4, line 6, after "Act", insert "(oth-
consultants,-or organizations thereof, and to er than title IV) ".
provide assistance for the training of its On page 6, line 9, Immediately after "of",
professional staff, in the same manner and insert "titles I, II, and III of".
under the same conditions as a standing On page 6, line 12, aftr "under", insert
committee of the Senate may procure such "titles I, IT, and III of".
services and provide such assistance under On page 7, line 1, immediately before "this",
subsections (i) and (j), respectively, of sec- insert "titles I, IT, and III of",
tion 202 of the _ Legislative Reorganization On page 7, line 2, immediately before
Act of 1946, and (10) to take depositions and "this", insert "title I, IT, or III of,,.
other testimony. No rule shall be adopted On page 12, line 9, immediately before
by the joint committee under clause (3) "this", insert "title I, IT, or III of".
providing that a finding, statement, recom- On page 16, line 13, immediately before
mendation, or report may be made by other "this", insert "titles I, IT, and III of".
than a majority of the members of the joint On page 18, line 3, immediately before
committee then holding office. "this", insert "title I, IT, or III of".
(b) (1) Subpenas may be issued under On page 18, line 14, Immediately
the signature of the chairman of the com- "this", insert "title I, IT, or III of".
mittee or of any subcommittee, or by any On page 18, line 23, immediately
member designated by such chairman, when "this", insert "title I, IT, or III of",
authorized by a majority of the members of On page 19, line 1, Immediately
before
before
such committee, or subcommittee, and may "this", insert "title I, IT, or III of".
be served by any person designated by any On page 19, line 21, Immediately before
such chairman or member. "this", inser'- "title I, IT, or III of".
(2) Each subpena shall contain a state- On page 20, line 2, immediately after "Act"
the particular investigation with respect to On page 20, line 6, immediately before
which the witness is summoned to testify or ,this", insert "titles I, IT, and III of".
to produce papers, and shall contain a state-
ment notifying the witness that if he de-
sires a conference with a representative of
the committee prior to the date of the hear-
ing, he may call or write to counsel of the
committee. -
(3) Witnesses shall be subpenaed at a rea-
sonably sufficient time In advance of any
hearing in order to give the witness an op-
portunity to prepare for the hearing and to
employ counsel, should he so desire. The
chairman of the joint committee or any
member thereof may administer oaths to
witnesses.
'AMENDMENT NO. 1922
At the request of Mr. ABOUREZK, the
Senator from -Wisconsin (Mr. -PROx-
MIRE) was added as a cosponsor of
amendment No. 1922, prohibiting use of
funds by any U.S. agency to violate or
encourage the violation of U.S. laws or
the laws of the country in which said
agency is operating, intended to be pro-
posed to the bill (S. 3394), the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1974.
NOTICE OF HEARING
Mr. JACKSON. Mr. President, I wish
to announce an open oversight hearing
on the Wilderness Act of 1964, relating to
various policies which have been and
are being formulated to implement its
provisions.
The hearing will be held on October
9, beginning at 10 a.m. in Room 3110,
Dirksen Senate Office Building.
CASTRO'S DIATRIBE
Mr. McCLURE. Mr. President, the
United States has been kicked in the
teeth again. The dictator of Cuba took
the opportunity of a visit by two U.S.
Senators to issue a diatribe against this
Nation which Would have been routine if
it had not been showcased by their
presence.
Castro undermined the alleged purpose
of the visit, which was the exploration of
improving relationships between the two
countries.
I say alleged because the Cuban dicta-
tor could not possibly consider calling a
country's actions dirty, illicit, and crimi-
nal a prelude to friendship. He could not
think that blaming world inflation on our
Nation's "deplorable imperialist policies"
would be conducive to improving rela-
tions, not even if he has read every word
of detraction published about this coun-
try and its citizens both here and abroad.
His Foreign Minister Raul Roa gave
the U.S. Senators the clear idea that
Cuba was prepared to work toward a
more normal relationship with the
United States. The fact that Castro then
used the opportunity of their visit to de-
liver a 45-minute denunciation of our,
country should give us a good motion of
what in the Communist Cuban mind
constitutes normal relationships.
I think that one thing has been made
clear. Cuba's motion of cooperation is to
use the good will of other nations in an
effort to undermine them.
I would also like to express my concern
those colleagues in this body. They
FOREIGN POLICY: MEN OR
MEASURES?
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, in the
October issue of the Atlantic, Thomas L.
Hughes, president of the Carnegie En-
dowment for International Peace, writes
an article worthy of the thoughtful at-
tention of every Member of the Congress.
I ask unanimous consent that the ar-
ticle, entitled "Foreign Policy: Men or
Measures?" be printed in the RECORD.
AMENDMENTS
AMENDMENT NO. 1850
At the request of Mr. ABOUREZK, the
Senator from New Hampshire (Mr. Mc-
INTYRE) was added as a cosponsor of
amendment No. 1850, cutting off aid to
Turkey, intended to be proposed to the
bill (S. 3394), the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1974.
Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
 Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
r 30, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE S 17663
disclosed before Congress recognizes the Experience should teach us to be most on enjoyment of this right, all others would
need f Dr immediate action? our guard to protect liberty when the Gov- lose half their value.
There is no question, however, that ernment's purposes are beneficent. Men born
those sensitive to civil liberties have long to freedom are naturally alert to repel inva- A right so -vital to individual liberty
Sion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. and, indeed, to our constitutional system
understood the need for congressional The greatest dangers o liberty lurk in insidi- deserves rigorous protection by Con-
action to end the dangers of Government ous encroachment by men of zeal, well- gress--the people's chosen representa-
snooping. As early as 1971 I introduced metening but without understanding. tives. The amendment being offered to-
legislation for that purpose. Now the
public at at large Relying on this historical judgment, day provides a timely opportunity to es-
the Supreme Court held in the 1972 Keith tablish that protection and assure the
need for legislation to protect their case that the Government cannot wire- American public that individual free-
rights against Government snooping. dom is still the foundation of our
Numerous opinion polls indicate that the tap American citizens for "domestic se- politi-
people's principal concern today is the curity" purposes without court authors- cal system.
zat:ion. In issuing this decision, the court Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
preservation of their freedom freedom declared. as a matter of constitutional sent to insert in the RECORD the text of
which is too easily and to often taken law, that the Government's self-disci- the amendment I submit today.
for granted. These polls, including some There being no objection, the amend-
is inadequate to protect the indi-
conducted by Louis Harris, have made pline
vidual freedoms guaranteed by the fourth meat was ordered to be printed in the
the following findings: amendment. The Court's judgment was
RECORD, as follows:
Fifty-two, percent of the public believes amen AMENDMENT No. 1945
that "things have become more repres- not premised on the malicious disposi-
sive in this country in the past few tions of those who inhabit the executive At the end of the bill, add the following
years:" branch. Rather, the judgment flowed new title:
Seventy-five percent of the public be- from the conflicting interests which the TITLE IV-JOINT COMMITTEE ON GOV-
lieves that "wiretapping and spying Government is required to serve. Speak- ERNMENT SURVEILLANCE AND INDI-
fng for a unanimous Court, Justice Lewis VIDUAL RIGHTS
under the excuse of national security is Powell examined the evolution and con-
ESTABLISHMENT
a serious threat to people's privacy; "
Severity-seven percent- of the public tours of the freedoms protected by the SF;c. 401. (a) There is hereby established
fou:.'th amendment. He then stated: a Joint Committee on Government Surveil-
believes Congress should enact legisla- lance and Individual Rights (hereinafter
tion to curb government wiretapping;' These Fourth Amendment freedoms can- referred to as the "joint committee") which
Seventy-three percent of the public be- not properly be guaranteed if domestic secur- shall be composed of fourteen members ap-
lieves Congress should make political ity surveillances may be conducted solely pointed as follows:
spying a major offense. witlin the discretion of the executive (1) seven members of the Senate, four
On the bof these and other find- brar:ch. The Fourth Amendment does not to be appointed by the majority leader of
In s, pollster basis a Harris drew two bher con- contemplate the executive officers of Govern- the Senate and three to be appointed bythe
g s, merit as neutral and disinterested magic- minority leader of the Senate; and
elusions. First, "Government secrecy can ttats.- Their duty and responsibility is to (2) seven Members of the House of Rep-
no longer be excused as an operational enforce the laws, to investigate and to prose- resentatives, four to be appointed by the
necessity, since it can exclude the parti- cute.... The historical judgment, which majority leader of the House of Representa-
cipation of the people in their own Gov- the Fourth Amendment accepts, is that un- tives and three to be appointed by the
ernment. and, indeed, can be used as a reviewed executive discretion may yield too minority leader of the House of Represents-
readily to pressure to obtain incriminating lives. for Second? the kbvert to ing their
kind of rsuc ess-" evidence and overlook potential invasion of (b) The joint committee shall select a
privacy and protected speech. chairman and a vice chairman from among
ful future leadership must be iron bound
irt this context, a congressional over- its members. intsight committee would be a two-edged (e) Vacancies in the membership of the
The message of these opinion polls is joint committee shall not affect the power
clear: Congress must enact legislation to swo:'d in the effort to end the abuses of of the remaining members to - execute the
end abusive government surveillance government snooping. On the one hand, functions of the joint committee and shall
practices which violate the fundamental this committee could provide assurances he filled in the samemanner as in the case
rights and liberties guaranteed by our to the public that government surveil- of the original appointment.
Constitution. The Government should lance activities are limited to those con- FUNCTIONS
not be able to use wiretaps and other ducted by lawful means and for legiti- SEc. 402. (a) It shall be the function of the
electronic devices to eavesdrop on citi- mate purposes. On the other hand, the joint committee-
zens without first obtaining a judicial oversight committee could help the exec- (1) to make a continuing study of the ex-
warrant based on probable cause. The utiv,I branch to insure that government tent and the method of - investigation or
Government should not be able to use in- agents do not misuse the public author- surveillance of individuals by any depart-
come tax returns and other computerized, ity entrusted to them. Fulfillment of ment, agency, or independent establishment
confidential information for political these two functions by investigation he oversight in the united states Government as suor surveillance relates to the
he
purposes. The Government should not committee would do much to eliminate right to privacy, the authority for, and the
be able to conceal its illicit activities by illegal and unethical government spying. need for such investigation or surveillance,
Involving "national security" or the need The need for this congressional over- and the standards and guidelines used to
for secrecy. In a word, the Government sight committee, then, should not be un- protect the right to privacy and other con-
should not be able to escape its obligation -derestimated. - The Individual's right to r,titutional rights of individuals;
to adhere to the Constitution and the privacy is one of our most cherished lib- (2) to make a continuing study of the
rule of law. Otherwise, we shall find that ernes. It is fundamental to the concept intergovernmental relationship between the
United
unrestrained government power has re- of democratic self-government where states and the States
involves the ater the area of Insofar that
of in inva stiga-
placed liberty as the hallmark of our each individual's private thoughts and tion or surveillance of individuals; and
society. beliefs are beyond the reach of govern- (3) as a guide to the several committees
By creating a joint committee of Con- merit. Without that right to privacy, the of the Congress dealing with legislation with
gress to oversee all government surveil- individual's freedom to participate in respect to the activities of the United States
lance within the United States, this and guide his government is jeopardized. Government involving the area of surveil-
amendment would do much to prevent Government then becomes a monster to lance, to file reports at least annually and at
the erosion of individual liberty. One be feared rather than a servant to be Such other times as the joint committee
trust ed. deems appropriate, with the Senate and the
does not have to attribute malevolent A; Justice Stephen Field stated House of Representatives, containing its
motives to Government officials in order in, findings and recommendations with respect
to- realize the need for such legislation. 1888: to the matters under study by the joint
Good intentions are not the criteria for Of all the rights of the citizen, few are of committee, and, from time to time, to make
judging the lawfulness or propriety of greater importance or more essential to his Such other reports and recommendations to
action. In fact, the best of peace and happiness than the right of per- the Senate and the House of Representatives
sonal security, and that involves not merely a7 it deems advisable; except that nothing
intentions often produce the greatest protection of his person from assault, but in. the foregoing provisions shall authorize'
dangers to individual liberty. As Supreme exemption of his private affairs, books and the joint committee, or any subcommittee
Court Justice Brandeis once observed: papers from the scrutiny of others. Without thereof, to examine lawful investigative or
'Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
 Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
September 30, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE S 1761
ernment's tra olicies. Adjustment as-
sistance shout e. made available to
particularly smaller co unities. When
the Federal Government dopts a trade
policy which undermines e economic
bases of localities througho the coun-
try, it owes those communitie special
duty to repair the damage. M mend-
ment would fulfill that duty by thor-
izing the executive branch to make ail-
adversely affected by imports. Areas
which are certified by the Secretary of
Commerce would become eligible for the
development assistance of the Economic
Development Administration.
In addition, my amendment proposes a
loan guarantee program which is linked
to general revenue sharing. The pro-
gram would work as follows: The Secre-
tary of Commerce . would be authorized
to extend up to $500 million in loan
guarantees to qualified applicants to
acquire, construct, or modernize plant
facilities or for such other purposes as
the Secretary determines are likely to
attract new 'investment and create new
long-term employment opportunities
within the area. The loan guarantees
would be made available to qualified ap-
plicants upon the approval of the Secre-
tary of Commerce under a joint security
agreement with the Governor of the
State in whose jurisdiction the affected
labor area lies. In order for the loan
guarantee to be extended, the Governor
of the State would sign a commitment
pledging such a portion of. the State's
next entitlement of general revenue
sharing. funds as necessary to cover up
to 50 percent of the amount defaulted.
In the event of a default, the Secre-
tary of Commerce would certify the
amount and circumstances of the. defi-
ciency to the Secretary of Treasury; the
Secretary of Treasury would reduce the
State's entitlement for the subsequent
year by an amount equal to 50 percent of
the guaranteed amount. The remaining
50 percent of the deficiency would be sat-
isfied out of the general revenues of the
Treasury.
Mr. President, as we proceed with
trade legislation, it is essential that we
take steps to assist the workers, firms,
and communities whose livelihoods will
be injured. This amendment seeks to
provide that assistance to communities.
I commend it to the attention of my col-
leagues in the Senate and on the Finance
Committee.
SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON CATA-
LYSTS OF PLATINUM AND CAR-
BON-H.R. 13370
AMENDMENT NO. 1939
(Ordered to be printed and to lie on
the table.)
Mr. TUNNEY submitted an amend-
ment intended to be proposed by him to
the bill (H.R. 13370) to suspend until
June 30, 1976, the duty on catalysts of
platinum and carbon used in producing
caprolactam.
FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF
1974. 3394
AMENDMENTS NOS. 1940 AND 1941
(Ordered to be printed and to lie on
the table.)
Mr. MATHIAS submitted two amend-
ments intended to be proposed by him
to the bill (S. 3394) to amend the For-
eign Assistance Act of 1961, and for other
purposes.
:IAI, SECURITY RECIPIENTS
AIRNESS ACT OF 1974-S. 3952
AMENDMENT NO. 1942
(O ered to be printed and referred
to the ommittee on Finance.)
Mr. S EIKER. Mr. President, I am
introducin an amendment to S. 3952,
the "Social urity Recipients Fairness
Act of 1974,' hich I cosponsored with
Senator PELL, include black lung ben-
efits among th programs covered by
the bill, providing r the speedy replace-
checks, and for the eform of`the dis-
ability insurance ap is process.
Delays in processing ack lung bene-
fit claims are a ratio disgrace. Mr.
President, the Social Sec ty Adminis-
tration must speed up proc ng of black
lung benefit cases so the th lsands of
eligible, needy recipients ca receive
their long overdue black lung b efits. I
have in my office literally hund of
cases from people who have ask my
long process of applying for black it
benefits. It is unusual for a claim to
amended 'by striking out "and (1) " and in-
serting in lieu thereof "(q), and (1) ".
(1) The amendment made by subsection
(a) shall be effective in the case of applica-
tions filed and written requests filed, under
part B of title IV of the Federal Coal Mine
Health and Safety Act of 1969, on and after
the first day of the first calendar month
which begins more than sixty days after the
date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 302. The Secretary of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare, in the administration of
part B of title IV of the Federal Coal Mine
Health and Safety Act of 1969, shall, with
respect to hearings and determinations on
claims thereunder, 'establish procedures for
the expediting of such hearings and determi-
nations which are, to the maximum extent
feasible, patterned after and consistent with
the objectives of section 1124 of the Social
Security Act.
DUTY-FREE ENTRY OF TELESCOPE
AT MAUNA KEA, HAWAII-H.R.
11796
AMENDMENT NO. 1943
(Ordered to be printed and referred
to the Committee on Finance.)
Mr. BUCKLEY submitted an amend-
ment intended to be proposed by him to
,the bill (H.R. 11796) to provide for the
duty-free entry of a 3.60-meter telescope
and associated articles for the use of the
Canada-France-Hawaii telescope project
at Mauna Kea, Hawaii.
AMENDMENT OF THE JURY SELEC-
TION AND SERVICE ACT-S. 3265
AMENDMENT NO. 1944
(Ordered to be printed and to lie on
the table.)
Mr. SCHWEIKER. Mr. President, on
behalf of Senators METZENBAUM, MON-
DALE, BIDEN, MCCLURE, and myself, I sub-
mit an amendment to S. 3265, to provide
for protection for jurors.
My amendment is identical to S. 3776,
which I introduced on July 18, and it
ill guarantee every person serving on
a 'tiny in the United States the right to
re to his or her prior employment
whe jury service is completed. S. 3776
is co onsored by Senators METZENBAUM,
MONDA , BIDEN, and MCCLURE.
My ndment has the following ma-
jor provis ns:
First. A employee-except a tem-
porary wor r-who applies for reem-
ployment wit ' 15 days after comple-
tion of jury d must be rehired with
his former senio y, status, and pay, pro-
vided he receives certificate from the
court verifying hiss ice.
processed in less than 4 months, and
common for a claimant to wait for a full
year for a final decision. This is totally
unacceptable to me, and highly unfair to
minerfi, their families, and widows who
have been burdened by black lung.
The black lung benefit program is one'
of our Nation's most deserving programs,
but it has become a paperwork night-
mare. My amendment would speed up
black lung benefit procedures so that the
average citizen, who desperately needs
these benefits, will no longer be the one
who gets hurt.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that my amendment be printed at
this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the amend-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
AMENDMENT NO. 1942
At the end of the bill, add the following
new title:
TITLE III-EXPEDITED PAYMENT OF
BLACK LUNG BENEFITS; AND EX-
PEDITED HEARINGS AND DETERMINA-
TIONS RESPECTING SUCH BENEFITS
SEC. 301. (a) Section 413(b) of the Federal
Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969 is
his position shall be. sidered to have
been on furlough or 1 ve of absence
during his jury service f purposes of
insurance and other empl ment bene-
fits, and such employee ca of be dis-
charged without cause for a -year pe-
riod thereafter.
Third. Original jurisdiction is reated
in the Federal district courts to',grant
money damages under this measure, re-
gardless of the amount of controversy,
and the Federal district courts are re-
Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6
 Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R0007001401~1-6aq 1
S'l 7662 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE September 3'0, 1974
quired to give precedence to recovery their review powers diligently and wiretaps on American citizens and
:actions filed under this bill. whether additional legislation is needed others when it feels "national security?"
Fourth. The U.S. attorney is required to protect the right to privacy and other is involved. This practice violates the
to act as attorney for any person seeking fundamental liberties from Gover:zment plain language of the 4th amendments-
?elief under this measure, and no set- snooping. which requires a judicial warrant based
>orney fees or court costs may be charged. The importance of this proposal can be on probable cause before the Goverr_-
I commend Senator NELSON and the appreciated best by reference to a? few ment can invade an individual's privacy.
Judiciary Committee for their prompt recent abuses of Government snooping: There is no public information concern-
action on S. 3265, and I think the inclu- On April 14, 1971, it was revealed that ing the number of warrantless wiretaps
:;ion of my amendment would insure that the FBI had conducted general surveil- installed in the last year or presently
American citizens who accept their civic lance of those who participated in the maintained. Incredibly enough, the de-
duty of jury service are not penalized Earth Day celebrations in 1970. These partment has refused to provide this in-
economically. celebrations involved tens of thousands formation-even in executive session--
of citizens, State officials, representatives to legislative subcommittees of the House
of the Nixon administration
and Mem- a
d S
t
,
n
ena
e.
ESTABLISHMENT OF A FEDERAL
hers of Congress. As the one who planned The Senate Watergate and Senate
PRIVACY BOARD-S. 3418 that first Earth Day, I cannot imagine Judiciary Committees received evidence
AMENDMENT NO. 1945 any valid reason for spying on individ- that in 1969 the White House established
(Ordered to be printed and to lie on uals exercising their constitutional rights a special unit in the Internal Revenue
the table.) of speech and assembly in a peaceable Service to provide the administration
JOINT COMMITTEE OF CONGRESS ON INDIVIDUAL manner. There is still no satisfactory ex- with secret access to the confidential tax
RIGHTS AND GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE planation of the surveillance. Nor is there records of thousands of Its "enemies."
Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, more any. guarantee It will not be repeated in The release of these private records was
than 20 years ago, Supreme Court Jus- the future. so flagrant and so widespread that one
tice Felix Frankfurter described the ev3- A 1973 Senate subcommittee report investigating Senator likened the IRS to
lotion of tyrannical power in the execu- detailed the extensive spying secretly a public lending library.
tive branch: conducted by 1,500 agents of the U.S. These examples are only the tip of
The accretion of dangerous power does not Army on more than 100,000 civilians in the iceberg. And yet they are sufficient
come in a day. It does come, however, slow)y, the late 1960's. This surveillance was to demonstrate what should be clear to
from the generative force of unchecked dis- directed principally at those suspected everyone: uncontrolled government
regard of the restrictions that fence in even of engaging in political dissent. No one snooping is a dangerous assault on the
the most disinterested assertion of authority, in the Congress knew about this spying, constitutional liberties which are the
Unfortunately, Justice Frankfurter's No one in the executive branch would cornerstone of our democratic system.
observation does much to explain why accept responsibility for it. Again, there A society cannot remain free and toler-
individual liberty has been eroded by on Is no guarantee that this sorry episode ate a government which can invade an
ever expanding web of snooping con- will not be repeated. In fact, a Senate Individual's privacy at will.
ducted at all levels of Government. For committee learned recently that in the Government snooping is particularly-
many years now, the Government has last 3 years-after the administration dangerous because often it is executed
used both simple and sophisticated tech- assured the public that the military without the knowledge or approval of
piques to exercise almost unlimited would no longer spy on individuals-the those officials who are accountable to the
power over the individual. The Govern- U.S. Army has maintained numerous sur- public. This, in turn, increases the proba-
ment installs wiretaps, plants electron, Govern- veillance operations on civilians in the ' bility that government invasions of in-
bugs, uses computerized information io United States. And an article in The New dividual privacy, as well as other funds -
assemble dossiers on individuals, and en- Republic magazine of March 30, 1974, mental constitutional liberties, will be
gages in other surveillance activities detailed the U.S. Army's use of wiretaps, accomplished by Illicit means and for
which make a mockery of the individual Infiltrators, and other surveillance tech- illegitimate purposes.
freedoms guaranteed by our Constitt:- niques to spy on American citizens liv- The break-in of Daniel Ellsberg's psy-
tion. ing abroad who supported the presiden- chiatrist's office provides a clear and
Such activities make clear the need tial candidacy of GEORGE McGovERN. The dramatic illustration of the problem.
for congressional controls of Government Army's spying was reportedly so eaten- This Illegal act was perpetrated in Sep-
spying. To this end, Senator JACKSON sive that it even intercepted a letter from tember 1971 by members of the "plumb-
and I are introducing an amendment to a college librarian in South Carolina who era," a special unit established within
S. 3418 which would establish a bipar- requested information about a German the White House and ultimately ac-
tisan joint committee of Congress to publication. countable to the President himself. After
oversee all Government surveillance ac- Innumerable Government official:. in- the break-in was publicly exposed, the
tivities. At least once each year, repro- eluding President Lyndon Johnson. Su- "plumbers" claimed that they were act-
sentatives of the FBI, the IRS, and every preme Court Justice William O. Douglas, ing under the explicit authority of the
governmental agency that engages in Congressman Hale Boggs, and Secretary President In an effort to protect "na-
surveillance activities would be required of State Henry Kissinger, believed that tional security." But available public
to testify before the joint committee their private telephones had been se- evidence suggests that Mr. Nixon did not
under oath about the full scope and na- cretly wiretapped. These concerns coin- give his approval to the break-in. Indeed,
ture of their respective agency's spying cide with known facts regarding other the White House transcripts indicate
activities, citizens. In May, 1969, for example, the that President Nixon did not learn of the
The joint committee, moreover, would White House secretly authorized wire- break-in until March 1973-18 months
be entitled to all relevant information taps on 17 Government officials and after it occurred.
concerning those activities and practice t. newspapermen without first obtainir g an He stated on numerous occasions.
There Is only one narrowly defined ex- approving judicial warrant. The pur- moreover, that he would have disap-
ception to the committee's broad juris- ported basis on these "taps" was a con- proved of the break-in if his prior au-
diction over Government surveillance: tern that these individuals were Involved thorization had been requested. In short.
those cases involving foreign powers who in "leaks" of sensitive information. The a blatant criminal act-which included
are engaged in unlawful activities which Government allegedly believed that pub- the violation of one doctor's privacy-
endanger this country's security. lication of this information did or would was perpetrated by Government agents
As part of its responsibilities, the joins, jeopardize "national security." Thee is because those with ultimate responsibil-
committee would be obligated to report still ? no public evidence to justify that ity had no procedure to insure that Gov-
to the full Congress as often as it deem; belief. Indeed, there is no public evidence ernment activities be conducted by law-
nnecessary, but in any event, at least once to demonstrate that all of the individuals ful means and for legitimate purposes.
a year. The report would include tho- tapped even had access to the infoi ma- The central question is how many
committee's findings as to whether the tion leaked. other incidents of illegal spying by the
Governmentis complying fully with the The Justice Department still main- Government remain undisclosed? And
law, whether the courts are exercising tains a practice of installing warrantless how many more such incidents must be
Approved For Release 2006/10/20: CIA-RDP76M00527R000700140101-6