In 1997, then Senator John Ashcroft had a far different view on the expansion of electronic surveillance than he holds now. He wrote the following op-ed piece in the August 12, 1997 Washington Times (available on lexis.com):

"Welcoming Big Brother"

"The Clinton administration would like the capability to read any international computer communications. Government agencies want access to decode, digest and discuss financial transactions, personal e-mail and proprietary information sent abroad - all in the name of national security. To accomplish this, President Clinton would like government agencies to have the keys for decoding all exported U.S. software and Internet communications.

This proposed policy raises obvious concerns about Americans' privacy, in addition to tampering with the competitive advantage that U.S. software companies currently enjoy in the field of encryption technology. Not only would Big Brother be looming over the shoulders of international cybersurfers, but he threatens to render our state-of-the-art computer software engineers obsolete and unemployed. There is a concern that the Internet could be used to commit crimes and that advanced encryption could disguise such activity. However, we do not provide the government with phone jacks outside our homes for unlimited wiretaps. Why, then, should be grant government the Orwellian capability to listen at will and in real time to our communications across the Web?

The protections of the Fourth Amendment are clear. The right to protection from unlawful searches is an indivisible American value. Two hundred years of court decisions have stood in defense of this fundamental right. The state's interest in effective crime-fighting should never violate the people's Bill of Rights. (emphasis supplied)

The president has proposed that American software companies supply the government with decryption keys to high-level encryption programs. Yet European software producers are free to produce computer encryption codes of all levels of security without providing keys to any government authority. Purchasers of encryption software value security about all else. These buyers will ultimately choose airtight encryption programs that will not be American-made programs to which the U.S. government maintains keys.

In spite of this truism, the president is attempting to foist his rigid policy on the exceptionally fluid and fast-paced computer industry. Furthermore, recent developments in decryption technology bring into question the dynamic of government meddling in this industry. Two weeks ago, the 56-bit algorithm government standard encryption code that protects most U.S. electronic financial transactions, from ATM cards to wire transfers, was broken by a low-powered 90 MHz Pentium processor.

In 1977, when this code was first approved by the U.S. government as a standard, it was deemed unbreakable. And for good reason: There are 72 quadrillion different combinations in a 56-bit code. However, with today's technology these 72 quadrillion different combinations can each be tried in a matter of time.

Two days after this encryption code was broken, a majority of the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee voted, in accordance with administration policy, to force American software companies to perpetuate this already compromised 56-bit encryption system - in spite of the fact that 128-bit encryption software from European firms is available on Web sites accessible to every Internet user. Interestingly, European firms can import this super-secure encryption technology (originally developed by Americans) to the United States, but U.S. companies are forbidden by law from exporting these same programs to other countries.

I believe that moving forward with the president's policy or the Commerce Committee's bill would be an act of folly, creating a cadre of government peeping Toms and causing severe damage to our vibrant software industries. Government would be caught in a perpetual game of catch-up with whiz-kid code-breakers and industry advances. Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott has signaled his objection to both proposals" (emphasis supplied)

"....The Clinton administration's paranoid and prurient interest in international e-mail is a wholly unhealthy precedent, especially given this administration's track record on FBI files and IRS snooping. Every medium by which people communicate can be subject to exploitation by those with illegal or immoral intentions. Nevertheless, this is no reason to hand Big Brother the keys to unlock our e-mail diaries, open our ATM records or translate our international communications. (emphasis supplied) "

Thanks to LiquidList for bringing this to our attention.

We have just returned back to Denver from a three day legal seminar in Key West. We spoke on the electronic surveillance changes in the Patriot Act. Others spoke on other aspects of the Act. By the last day, the Patriot Act had been renamed "The Anti-American Act" and Ashcroft was referred to only as "Cardinal Richilieu."

Cardinal Richilieu, for those of you who are not students of history, was prime minister of France under King Louis XIII. The King was considered a weak ruler. "Richelieu filled the void, more or less running the empire via his advice to the king. A clever politician and strategist, Richelieu expanded royal power, punished dissent harshly, and built France into a great European power.....He was made out to be a villain in the Three Musketeers by Alexander Dumas, and since then, his name has "become synonymous with political intrigue and ambitious power "behind the throne."

We think the shoe fits pretty well.