Association Urges House Judiciary Committee to Defeat HR 5825

The Computer and Communications Industry Association yesterday urged the House Judiciary Committee to vote down HR 5825, an electronic surveillance bill that the group says threatens U.S. technology businesses as well as the basic civil liberties of ordinary Americans. In a letter sent to Judiciary Chair James Sensenbrenner and other members of the committee, CCIA urged members to consider the bill's effect on international commerce and human rights policy. The measure will come to a vote today.

"Technology flourishes when we are open to competition, to our users, and to new ideas," CCIA President and CEO Ed Black wrote. "A commitment to openness in commerce, consumers, and ideas cannot be sustained, however, if users fear a betrayal of the privacy and the security of their personal and business communications. Congressional approval of sweeping and warrantless electronic surveillance could irrevocably sunder the public trust in the sanctity of civil rights, privacy, and security in our modern information infrastructure."

Letter Text

Dear Chairman Sensenbrenner, Rep. Conyers:
As the Judiciary Committee prepares for Wednesday's scheduled markup of HR 5825, we write to register our profound misgivings over this measure and urge you to refrain from reporting out this legislation. Legislation that threatens fundamental rights of citizens, constitutional principles, and the freedom and openness of the Internet ought not to be considered in the highly politically charged and pressured closing days of Congress. These issues are too important to have partisan considerations play the large role that, by many media accounts, they do now.

No matter how important electoral politics may be, your Committee's historic role as a defender of core liberties must continue. The Judiciary Committee must ensure the right of free peoples to use an Internet that they can trust. In our view, HR 5825 would undercut important checks and balances necessary to restrain possible executive excess. Neither intelligence officers, for whom privacy and free expression are of only secondary concern, nor the political officials to whom they report should be free of effective oversight.

We urge you to heed carefully concerns about the constitutionality, scope, and wisdom of such eavesdropping. We understand our industry's technology and the many ways in which it can be used. We cannot overemphasize that technology which can be used for great good can also serve repressive purposes. The power that comes from technological surveillance is massive. It needs greater, not lesser checks to curb its misuse.

The mere possibility of widespread, secret, and unchecked surveillance of the billions of messages that flow among our customers, especially U.S. citizens, will corrode the fundamental openness and freedom necessary for our communications networks. Even if this power is not deliberately misused, the loss of a sense of privacy in personal and confidential business communications will inflict great and long-lasting damage on the dynamic and innovative growth intrinsic to the high technology sector.

Technology flourishes when we are open to competition, to our users, and to new ideas. A commitment to openness in commerce, consumers, and ideas cannot be sustained, however, if users fear a betrayal of the privacy and the security of their personal and business communications. Congressional approval of sweeping and warrantless electronic surveillance could irrevocably sunder the public trust in the sanctity of civil rights, privacy, and security in our modern information infrastructure.

Proponents for change are in some cases justified in calling for "modernization" and "flexibility." But such words can too easily distract attention from proposals that undermine constitutional checks and balances. Proposals that vest invisible and unrestrained surveillance power seem destined to place industry in the role of a law enforcement surrogate, thereby sacrificing customers' privacy and security. The freedom and openness of our modern communications networks should not be so lightly compromised. Such an important step, if undertaken, should occur in a less politicized environment and only after great deliberation.

There is another dimension to this issue of which we are acutely aware. Our industry is confronted with escalating monitoring and surveillance by repressive foreign regimes. When challenged, totalitarian states often justify their policies by pointing to U.S. government practices.

The U.S. government needs to lead in promoting freedom within repressive regimes. But such leadership will fall flat if all we can show is a different order of magnitude of government surveillance. A failure to protect basic freedoms now can only weaken the hand of U.S. companies that must contend with censors, regulators and secret police abroad.

American leadership requires that we set a good example. We as a nation must respect legitimate, constitutional interests including Congressional oversight of the Executive Branch. This nation and its Constitution have arrived at a moment of truth. Whatever your Committee and Congress decide will impact the freedom and openness of communications networks around the world.