Document: Statement by Rep. Dingell re SAFE Act, 5/25/99.


Opening Statement by Rep. John Dingell (D-MI). Re: House Telecom Subcommittee Hearing on HR 850, SAFE Act. Date: May 25, 1999. The page contains two versions: a transcription of the statement as delivered by Rep. Dingell, and a text of the statement published in the House Commerce Committee Democrats web site. The two versions differ significantly. The former document was created by Tech Law Journal by transcribing from a poor quality audio recording of the hearing.

Statement as Delivered

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the recognition. And, Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing today, which is very important.

This is not an easy subject. The Committee has grappled with this matter for a number of years. Unfortunately, we have had little success in finding the right solution. As each day goes by, technological advances create an even greater need for a coherent national policy.

I hope that as the need for a solution becomes more compelling, this Committee will redouble its efforts to find a sensible rational middle ground that balances the crucial interests at stake.

We lead the world in the production of computer hardware and software. Technology is an engine which drives the global economy and drives the U.S. economy. We must not sit idly by and let U.S. companies lose their edge in the world market place because they cannot deliver the kind of secure products and services that customers demand.

But, as I’m sure we’ll hear from our witnesses today, the advent of increasingly sophisticated technology is a double-edged sword. While it can make global commerce and communications more secure, it can make national security and law enforcement less so. We all know too well that even in the post-Cold War era, the wars against international terrorism, espionage, and human rights abuses continue unabated.

A significant threat exists to this country from activities of people from out ___, both in the military and espionage sense, but also from the standpoint of crime, drugs, and ___ of that sort.

Mr. Chairman, we have an important duty to see to it that we protect all of the vital interests of the United States in foreign commerce and communications. Thus, we have an important need to address the terrific concerns of the administration with regard to security. Very very difficult. And I am not quite sure how it has been done, or how it can be done, or how it will be done. But I hope that we will work very hard on this particular point, and sit around, trying to figure out -- craft a sensible ___ encryption policy we can all support.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Commerce Committee Democrats web site version

STATEMENT
OF
THE HONORABLE JOHN D. DINGELL

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TELECOMMUNICATIONS
TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
HEARING ON
H.R. 850, THE SECURITY AND FREEDOM
THROUGH ENCRYPTION (SAFE) ACT

May 25, 1999

I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for recognizing me, and want to commend you for holding this important hearing today.

The subject at hand is not an easy one. This Committee – and several others in Congress – have grappled with encryption policy for years. Unfortunately, we have had little success so far in finding the right solution. And, as each day goes by, technological advances create an even greater need for a coherent national policy.

Mr. Chairman, I hope that as the need for a solution becomes more compelling, this Committee will redouble its efforts to find a rational middle ground that balances the crucial interests at stake.

Our country leads the world in the production of computer hardware and software, and technology is now the engine that drives the global economy. We must not sit idly by and let U.S. companies lose their edge in the world market because they can’t deliver the kind of secure products and services that customers demand.

Mr. Chairman, it is clearly the duty of this Congressional committee to make sure that the vital interests of the United States in foreign commerce and communications are protected. In carrying out that responsibility, we must take the lead in thoroughly understanding the role of encryption, and carefully consider the legitimate concerns of both sides of this debate.

Both law enforcement and the business community insist that a balanced and reasonable encryption policy is their goal. My hope is that the distinguished witnesses before us today will shed light on ways to achieve that goal.

Again, I commend you for holding this hearing, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to working with you to craft an encryption policy that we can all support. I yield back the balance of my time.