4
4
Tuesday, March 8, 1994
OPINION UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
VIEWPOINT
Privacy bill proposition invades lives of everyone
A new piece of legislation submitted to Congress by the Clinton administration would treat all U.S. citizens as guilty suspects. The legislation, called the "Digital Telephony and Communications Privacy Improvement Act of 1994," would construct an information network that would allow the government to access U.S. citizens' phone calls, TV preferences and credit card purchases. The government would be able to draw up a personality profile on any random citizen picked to be investigated.
Advocates of the legislation insist that it would help the government fight terrorism and criminals.
But two glaring examples exist to contradict the validity of such a statement. First, the FBI claims that wire-tapping difficulties have impeded investigations. Their solution is to bring America "on line" into a national wire-tap, so any person could be monitored. However, a recent study has concluded that in recent years the FBI has not had problems in conducting wire-taps in their investigations.
Second, the government's assertion that only criminals and terrorists would be tracked is ludicrous. Bringing America on line opens everyone's window and gives the government a set of binoculars. To determine whether someone was a criminal or a terrorist, the government simply could tap in and listen as long as they liked to anyone at any time. Having every home in America available for the government to eavesdrop on is a frightening page from George Orwell's 1984.
Some members of the Clinton administration would like to know more about what we are reading, who we are voting for and with whom we are associating. We shouldn't make that information so readily available.
CARSON ELROD FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Line-item veto the key to balancing U.S. budget
Last week Congress failed to pass a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Congress acted appropriately. A Line-item veto is a better way to cut excess government spending.
When the United States goes into a recession the government should try to spend more money to help bring the economy back into balance. With a balanced budget amendment, the government would be unable to inject the needed money into the economy, thus leaving the country in a continuous recessive state.
Line-item veto for the President is a better way of cutting excess spending. The line-item veto would cut waste by allowing the President to cut off pork-barrel spending from bills.
Representatives sometimes add unnecessary amendments to bills for expenses outside the scope of bills. When the President gets a bill, he currently has only the choice of passing the bill along with the unnecessary expenses added to it or vetoing the entire bill. To veto the entire bill because of one unnecessary amendment would be wasteful and politically disadvantageous. However, if the President is able to pass a bill except for the amendment, he can avoid the unnecessary expense and waste.
DAVID ZIMMERMAN FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD.
Some say the line-item veto gives the president too much power — allowing him to cross off anything he would like from a bill, not just unnecessary expenses. While the line-item veto could be abused, the President becomes the sole person responsible for using it, putting pressure on him not to abuse it.
Big Brother would be lurking over our shoulders if act passes
If passed, the Digital Telephony and Communications Privacy Improvement Act of 1994 would bring new meaning to the phrase, "I'm all ears." It's a euphremia even Ross Perot could not explain, pie charts included. In fact, there's nothing in this act that would improve the privacy of Americans at all. What it would do is give the federal government increased surveillance of citizens' private conversations and financial transactions over the growing network of digital and fiber-optic communications.
The proposal would create a systems software, network capable of monitoring public communications nationwide. The new system would update current surveillance techniques that the FBI says are not sophisticated enough to handle the immense flow of communications, including cellular calls. Agents contend that this new technology is needed to thwart drug dealing and terrorist activities such as the World Trade Center bombing. And they want you and me to pay for it — an estimated half-billion dollars.
The federal government asking taxpayers to finance something termed "Privacy Improvement" should set off whistles and alarms throughout the country. The FBI says it would only use the monitoring system to investigate criminals, Critics, however, say it is nothing short of Big Brother listening in on our daily conversations. Apparently the government wants to develop a system that would recognize and track key words like DRUG and BOMB. This information would be used to develop a character profile of an individual and alert investigators of any potential criminal activity.
put on your telephone conversations? Every conversation would be BOM-Barded with regulation as it is DRUG through a bureaucratic MINEfield. With COCAINE-wary federal agents listening, each word could be a stick of DYNAMITE leading agents to EXTORT an undeserved profile of you. With overzealous prosecutors BLOWing things out of proportion, defending yourself against claims BLASTing your reputation would make many of us CRACK under the pressure.
Can you imagine the chill this would
It's frightening enough that all someone has to do is accuse you of possessing illegal drugs before a law enforcement agency can impound your property. Giving them sweeping access to our personal conversations is just inviting governmental abuse.
These may be isolated examples, but keep in mind that narcotics agents do make mistakes. People have had their homes and automobiles seized by law enforcement agencies with little or no evidence against them, only to have to buy back the property when no charges are filed. They've
also been known to confuse search warrant addresses and burst into the homes of obviously innocent elderly residents to search for drugs. Oh, they soon realize their mistake, but not until after they've kicked down the front door, trashed the entire house and sledgehammered the toilet to pieces. Are these the kind of agents we want to give more power to?
The big sell to Congress on this policy is its anti-terrorist capability. The World Trade Center bombing provided the impetus for extending this technology to the government. It's been reported, though, that informal surveys of FBI offices throughout the country found no recent complaints of agents facing "technology-based" problems with surveillance.
The Digital Telephony and Communications Privacy Improvement Act would go a long way, possibly too far, to protect us. Rest assured, it would do little to improve your privacy.
Greg Thonen is a Kannau City, Kan., senior in Journalism and sociology.
THE GOVERNMENT'S PLAN TO IMPLEMENT NEW SURVEILLANCE TECHNIQUES
Bill. what's up with the Astroturf?
When one is entrusted with the responsibility of a weekly column, one often finds oneself wrestling with weight topics such as health care, foreign policy, civil liberties and how the Olympic figure skating judges robbed the ethereally lovely Nancy Kerrigan of the gold medal that was rightfully hers. But lately such concerns have been driven from my mind by a nagging obsession that just won't go away. Why did Bill Clinton put Astroturf in the back of his El Camino?
As most people probably know by now, the President was talking to General Motors Corp. employees in Louisiana when he began to reminisce about a GM automobile he owned back in the days when GM was making people realize the benefits of Japanese cars.
"When I was a younger man and had a life," quoth the leader of the free world, "I owned an El Camino pickup in the '70s. It was a real sort of Southern deal. I had Astroturf in the back. You don't want to know why, but I did."
Now, the President's first mistake was in admitting to ownership of a Chevrolet El Camino, which, for the benefit of the uninitiated, was a bizarre hybrid between a car and a pickup truck that was probably the ugliest gasoline-powered vehicle in the history of technology. This disclosure forces me to question Mr. Clinton's judgment. I voted for you, Bill; don't make me reconsider my largely unwavering support. I bet Al Gore never owned an El Camino.
Now we are forced to wonder what Astrotruf was doing in the back of the truck, and why the President believes we don't want to know the reason.
I had my immediate suspicions, of course. Apparently I was not alone, because Mr. Clinton went on the radio show of some New York guy named Don Imus to clarify his earlier remarks. I had never heard of Don Imus before the 1992 campaign, but apparently someone died and left him in charge, because Mr. Clinton talks to him all the time.
"It (the Astrotruf) wasn't for what everyone thought it was for when I made the comment, I'll tell you that," Clinton said. Apparently he used it to carry luggage in his truck and the Astrotruf helped prevent scratches on the pain job.
I've decided I believe this explanation for the time being, for one main reason: Astroturf hurts. You can get some serious abrasions on Astroturf without proper padding. If Mr. Clinton had really used his El Camino as a base of operations, it were, he would have gone down to the Army-Navy store and picked up some old blankets. Besides, he was old enough and rich enough in the '70s to afford a place of his own, which would obviate the need to use the pickup for such business.
But this raises several questions. Why did the President feel it necessary to mention his luggage-accommodation methods to a bunch of auto workers? Why did he assume that they did not wish to know the real purpose of the Astroturf if it was as mundane as all that? Why is it considered Southern to protect your paint job from scratches with Astroturf? Did he really haul suitcases often enough to justify what was apparently a permanent Astroturf blanket in the bed of the truck? Why Don Imus?
I don't think we're ever going to know the answers to these questions. This is one for the ages. But all the same, I prefer that the speculation stop here. Every day I wake up and expect to see a story in the paper about how Bob Dole thinks the Astroturf is in some way connected to the Whitewater affair. Some things don't change.
Paul Henry is a Tacome, Wash., graduate student in Journalism.
KANSAN STAFF
BEN GROVE, Editor
LISA COSMILLO, Managing editor
TOM EBLEN General manager, news adviser
BILL SKEET. Svstemscoordinator
Editors
Asst Managing Editor...Dan England
Assistant to the editor...J.R. Claiborne
News...Kristi Fogler, Katie Greewenwright
Teacher Editorial...Colleen McCain
Editorial...Nathan Olson
Campus...Jess DeHaven
Sports...David Dorsey
Photo...Doug Hesse
Features...Sara Bennett
Wire...Allison Lippert
Freelance...Christine Laue
JUSTIN GARBERG Business manager
JEANNE HINES Sales and marketing adviser
JENNIFER BLOWEY Retail sales manager
BUSINESS STAR
Campus sales manager...Joseb Earley
Regional Sales mgr...Troy Tawray
National & Coop sales mgr...Robin King
Special Parts Collections...Shelly McConnell
Production mgr...Laura Guth
Gretchen Koehlerkellchl
Marketing director...Shannon Relly
Creative director...John Carlton
Classified mgr...Kelly Connally
Tears mgr...Wing Chan
Business Staff
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words. They must include the writer's signature, main address and telephone number. Writers affiliated with the University of Arizona are required to use standard typefaces.
Guest columns should be typed, double-space and fewer than 700 words. The writer will be photographed.
The Kansan reserves the right to reject or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Stauffer-Flint Hall.
Trafficway could cost city more than money
Local bureaucrats are glossering over complaints about the South Lawrence Trafficway and few KU students seem to care. The project sounds benign enough, but the freeway will rumble past Haskell's campus and disrupt their religious sites. There is also the issue of the destruction of wetland areas that are among the last 5 percent left in the state and have been a national landmark since 1969. Forget the $62 million price tag — the noise and pollution and increased traffic dangers are a high enough cost to pay. The only people benefiting from the trafficy way are developers who will line the freeway with mega-malls, parking lots, gas stations and billboards that will drain downtown business.
If this freeway were going through a church, golf course or Allen Field
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
House, community leaders would be in an indignant uproar. If you care for more important things, let others know how you feel. Write letters and make phone calls. Contact the city government and complain. Call members of local environmental action groups. Talk to Haskell students and mobilize. Lawrence does not have to be victimized by civic sorrow.
Robert MacRae Independence junior
Resolution is official despite the confusion
I am writing in regard to a story run by the Kansan in December entitled "Trafficway resolution may encounter veto or revote." In this article there is some uncertainty expressed about the outcome of Student Senate Resolution 1994-306. The resolution, which is intended to support the Haskell Indian Nations
University Student Senate's protest of the trafficway and call for the city to look for alternative routes for the South Lawrence Trafficway, was passed at the Student Senate meeting on Dec. 8, 1993. The total number of votes cast was less than the number of members needed for quorum. Assuming that all members present voted, President John Shoemaker and I believed at that time that the decision did not reflect the will of the entire body. But the exact number of votes cast was not recorded in the minutes, and a motion for quorum was not called until after Resolution 1994-306 was passed. Therefore, there is no evidence to suggest that the resolution did not pass. On Dec. 19 the resolution officially was passed by the Student Senate and sent to the vice chancellor for student affairs for further approval.
There was some discrepancy as to whether or not President Shoemaker actually signed a legislative action
sheet, approving the resolution, before Dec. 18. Shoemaker is uncertain whether this was a clerical error or an attempt to circumvent his authority, but he denies signing the document. However, this issue is moot, since the resolution has, in fact, officially been passed by the Student Senate.
President Shoemaker and I apologize for the confusion caused by this incident and for any inconvenience to the sponsoring senators, Shelly Witt, former off-campus senator, Phillip Mabry, residential senator, the Haskell Indian Nations University Student Senate and the members of KU Environs. We support the actions taken by the Student Senate. Although I cannot speak for President Shoemaker, I support this call for the city of Lawrence to look for an alternative route for the South Lawrence Trafficway.
Tim Dawson Student body vice president
---