Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 12, 2016
Document Release Date: 
December 13, 2001
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
June 2, 1975
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP77M00144R000800130031-9.pdf1.47 MB
June , 1975 Approved For T :690 R~77"000800130031-9 fendant shows by a preponderance of evi- dence that at the time of the violation It was not intentional and resulted, from a bona fide error notwithstanding the maintenance of reasonable procedures to assure compli- ance and avoidance of error." SEc. 15. (a) Section 621(a) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act is amended- (1) by redesignating paragraph (1) as paragraph (2) and inserting the following before such redesignated paragraph: "(1) The Federal Trade Commission shall prescribe regulations to carry out the pur- poses of this title. Such regulations may con- tain such classifications, differentiations, and other provisions, and may provide for such adjustments and exceptions as in the judg- ment of the Commission are necessary or proper to effectuate the purposes of this title to prevent circumvention or evasion thereof, or to facilitate compliance therewith. Any reference to any requirement imposed under this title or. any provisions thereof includes reference to the regulations of the Commis- sion under this title or the provisions thereof in question."; (2) by inserting after "documents," in paragraph (2) as redesignated the phrase "examination and production of consumer reports and consumer reporting agency files,". (b) Section 604 of such Act is amended (for himself, Mr. MATHIAs, and Mr. thereof "Except as provided in section 621 ments as to the need for a very limited (a) (2), a". _ use in the intelligence field. The total (c) Section 608 of such Act is amended !number o such tests under the resent inserting after "604," the following: "tnd regulations. however, suggests a serious except as provided in section 621 (a) (2.);". b f th 1it d +i- th t mia UXCe a r has been ultimately successful. I believe, Mr. President, that the Senate has given the issue perhaps more than. adequate consideration and that the time is ripe for final action. My colleague, the distinguished Con-' gressman from New York. Mr. KOCH, had introduced a similar -mill in the other bod and he re its the likelihood of e favorable House ac ion, I OgM also not Mr. President. that no Member o the Congress has devoted more of his time and given more thorough study to the entire issue of privacy than has ED KOCH. He should, I believe, be congratulated for his leadership in this area. Senator Ervin's efforts were successful in convincing the execu ?_ve branch voluntarily limit its use of lie detector jests. Under Civil Service Regulations issued in January 1972 the use of these di -ices was restricted to agencies having intelligence or counterintelligence re- sponsi i i les and upon written. authori- zation b the Chairman of the Civil Serv- ce ommission. Yet m 9 , almost 7,000 such tests were authorized. This bill bans the use of lie detectors by any Federal, enc Out a r. p . -1. T wi fir t. a Ilse O eve y p might be justifled_ Accordingly. until I S 9139 procedure. As to the first two of these three points, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD at this point in my remarks an excellent staff study prepared by the Staff of the Con- stitutional Rights Subcommittee on the reliability and constitutionality of poly- graphs. There being no objective, the study was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: - TIIE POLYGRAPH TEST: RELIABILITY The theory behind the polygraph proce- dure and its results involves physiological responses purportedly related to the act of lying. It is professed that lying causes con- flict to arise within the individual subject. The conflict produces fear and anxiety which, in turn, produce physiological changes which the polygraph devices can measure and record. Thus, the assumption underlying the polygraph test is that a uni- form relationship exists between an act of deception, certain specific emotions, and various bodily changes 23 A typical polygraph examination may con- tain several features. The subject to be in- vestigated is usually ushered into a waiting room where it is hoped he will avail himself of the favorable polygraph literature left for his attention. His reactions to these readings are often observed by the secretary or recep- tionist and reported to the examiner prior to his encounter with the subject 24 The pur- pose of this conditioning is that the person to be examined carry with him into the test a belief in the reliability, accuracy and even infallibility of the polygraph. Examiners maintain that it is important and helpful ,n obt.a.ining good res onses for an individual p an the co be convinces that his lies will be aetected, _ - _ Reporting Act is amended by adding at the -~ ' end thereof the following new sentence: "The exception could be sufficiently restricted, thus heightening his sensitivity to the ques- Federal Trade Commission is authorized to I will propose a total ban. tions and the likelihood of clear physiolog- determine whether such inconsistencies exist. It is not in the Federal Government, ical changes. 21 The "spy" in the waiting room The Commission may not determine that any but rather in the commercial won w ere reports to the examiner the degree of skepti- State law Is inconsistent with any provision a invasion of privacy is taking place cism or acceptance exhibited by the subject of this chapter if the Commission determines while reading the polygraph literature. In that such law gives greater protection to the b ).V a-scale use of these devices. There this way, it is claimed, the examiner can bet- consumer." are no relic le statistics on a nun er ter understand and compensate for all types EFFECTIVE DATE of lie detector tests givenf v nriva ex- of recorded responses to his questions. SEc. 17. Section 609(d) of the Fair Credit' aminers for business purposes, but Still prior to his being connected to the Reporting Act, as added by this Act, shall knowledgeable estimates have range machine, the subject is brought into the test- become effective 60 days after the date of from a low of to a high or Ing area, usually a room sparsely decorated enactment. per year. This bill would, the rfore, Tar and furnished to avoid the presence of out- t side distractions or stimuli. At this point, d t By Mr. BAYH TUNNEY, Mr. ABOUREZK) : S. 1841. A bill to protect the constitu- tional rights of citizens of the United States and to prevent unwarranted in- vasion of their privacy by prohibiting the use of the polygraph type equipment for certain purposes. Referred to the Com- mittee on the Judiciary. Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, I am today introducing, together with the distin- guished chairman of the Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights, Mr. TUNNEY, Mr. MATHIAS, and Mr. ABOUREZK, a bill to bar the use of polygraphs, Psychological Stress Evaluators-PSE-and other me- chanical or electrical devices used by the Federal Government or by employers en- gaged in interstate commerce. Strict limitations of the use of polygraphs have been considered by the Senate on a num- ber of occasions in recent years. Our dis- tinguished former colleague, Mr. Ervin, guided no fewer than five separate bills through the Senate which would have placed some limits on the use of poly- graphs by the executive branch. Yet after almost a decade of. effort, no legislation In n any person engage e.. -3 a com- some polygraph operators may make use of merce from "permitting, requiring, or "two-way" mirrors to further observe the requesting" any employee or applicant to individual's behavior?e Then, with the ma- take a lie detector test, and it would en- chine in view, the examiner typically con- force this prohibition with criminal ducts a preliminary interview which aids him sanctions. in assessing the type of person he Is dealing I should emphasize, Mr. President, 'With, and in obtaining other knowledge he that the bill would not in any way impede might deem helpful In his interpretation o- the results of the polygraph test?7 The gen- law enforcement authorities from mak- eral questions pertaining to the circum- ing use of the. investigative tool which stances being investigated are typically gone a polygraph provides if there is reason to over to familiarize the subject with them and believe that a crime has been committed, to allow the operator the opportunity to alter I believe, Mr. President, that the rec- them where he feels it is necessary to elicit clear, definite responses.28 The pneumoeraph ord presented to the Senate over the past tube, measuring respiration, is then placed decade suggests three essential reasons around the subject's chest, the blood pres- which justify the legislation we intro- sure and pulse cuff around his upper arm, duce today. First, clear evidence exists and electrodes, which record galvanic skin as to the questionable reliability of the responses (the change in the electrical con- results of these tests. Second, an analy- ducivity of the skin due to increased skin sis of the judicial development of the perspiration) are attached to his hands. The examiner then proceeds with the ques- constitutional right of privacy reveals tioning as he sits behind his control desk that the use of lie detector tests poses watching and marking the recordings of serious problems under the first, fourth, these devices. and fifth amendments, all of which were How reliable is this process in determining cited by the Supreme Court in Griswold the veracity of an individual? A study con- against Connecticut as constituting the ducted at the Massachusetts Institute of "penumbra where privacy is protected Technology concluded: from government intrusion". Third, and . ? ? There exists no public body of knowl- equally important to me, is the inher- edge to support the enthusiastic claims of Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800130031-9 S 9140 Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800130031-9 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE June 2, 1975 operators. There are no publications in re- putable journals, no facts, no figures, tables, or graphs. In short, there is nothing to document the claims of accuracy or effective- ness except bald assertions .w " Though studies and experiments to assess the polygraph's effectiveness have been done, even when interpreted favorably, their re- suits seem far from convincing of the poly- graph's reliability. In an experiment con- ducted for the Defense Department, subjects were tested to determine the effect of their faith in the polygraph on the ability of the examiners to detect their lins8? The study concluded that a belief in the machine's ac- curacy did aid the detection of responses under certain types of questioning .31 but it is significant to note the figures derived for the accuracy of the examiners' interpretations: only 83 percent of the subjects were cor- rectly classified as guilty or innocent in the paradigm used82 Even a study conducted by a large, well- known polygraph firm, yielded results which, when scrutinized, are unsettling. The experi- ment was set up so that examiners worked independently and solely with the records of polygraph tests" The analyses of the ten examiners, averaged, produced 87.75 percent accuracy in Identifying guilty and innocent subjects84 The experimenters were quick to point out that the examiners involvedin the project did not have the benefit of observing or interviewing the subject so as to "make allowances for a resentful or angry attitude, a condition which could cause an error in interpretation of polygraph records." Fur- ther, when figures were calculated separately, experienced examiners achieved an accuracy of 91.4 percent, whereas the accuracy of in- experienced examiners was 79.1 percent 5' The enthusiasm expressed by supporters of the polygraph for results such as these seems unfounded. Even an eight or nine percent fallibility figure is substantial, and there is admittedly a large degree of subjectivity in the examiner's estimation of the subject's state of mind. The fact that there are no uniform standards or qualifications which require a minimum level of competence for examiners cast their subjective evaluations into even greater doubt. Polygraph promoters and examiners gen- erally quote a 95 percent accuracy rate for the tests performed in actual, as opposed to experimental situations. They also hasten to add that most errors are made in attaching an innocent label to a guilty individual, a fact they apparently view as comforting. The pro- ponents' statistics are based on test results checked against the future dispositions of the subjects: an admission of guilt, confes- sion to a crime, or the judgment of a jury. Yet even these means of verification are not conclusive. Whether or not a person has lied can never be known beyond any doubt; the confession or jury verdict may. in fact, be false or wrong. The staff, in short, has found no independent means for confirming the results of actual polygraph examinations u There is an established probability theory, however, which purports to sustain the valid- ity of polygraph results. The theory of condi- tional probability maintains that, unless a d.ia;nositic instrument has been demon- strated to be completely infallible, the prob- ability that it will be accurate in any one test depends upon the prevalence of the condition being diagnosed in the group being tested:5 In a group of 1,000 subjects, suppos- ing 25 to be liars, and with a 95 percent ac- curacy rate assumed for the polygraph, the conditional probability for the lie detector is that for every one true liar, or "employment risk," found, two people will be falsely classi- fied as such.* Another objection to the claims of reli- ability for the polygraph test centers around the meaning of the physiological responses recorded. In hearings held before the Hou;,e Foreign Operations and Government Infor- mation Subcommittee, chaired by Represent- ative John Moss, experts declared that, given a physiological response under the polygraph test procedure, any of three inferences could be made: either the subject was lying; or La was telling the truth but some emotional factor, such as anger or embarrassment, caused the reaction; or the response wess generated by a neurotic pre-condition of the subject" Other less frequent or obvious fac- tors possibly affecting the machine-measured replies include-extreme- nervousness; physic'- logical abnormalities, such as heart cond - tions, blood pressure problems, headaches at.d colds; deep psychological problems; the u::? of drugs and alcohol; ratigue; simple body' y movements; and even the subject's sex Thus, ~ he fact that peculiar physiological responses may be caused by physiologie:,l factors unrelated to whether the subject -s lying casts the validity of these tests into further disrepute. Furthermore, are there mental -activitic-s besides deception that can cause the physics l changes recorded by the polygraph?_ Psych':- atric experts state that any situation 'c.:r stimuli that produced feelings of frustration. surprise, pain, shame, or embarrassme"r t could be responisble for such physiological respon:.estl In fact, humans do respond di; - ferently to emotional stresses. No one would claim the physical responses to different people would be the same even under simiitr stimuli." Nor, for that matter, has there been any relationship proven between lying well as guilt, fear, or anxiety.44" - people cannot go through life with - out some lying, and every individual builds up his own set of responses to the act. Lying can conceivably result in satisfaction, excite- ment, humor, boredom, sadness, hatred, its well as guilt, fear, and anxiety.14" Negative polygraph result could be obtained because of feelings such as ho::- tility, possessed unconsciously by a men- tally-unbalanced subject S5 Are there other individual differences whit;i could affect the polygraph? Studies conducted have shown that many individlual factor-;, Including skin pigment, may affect the gal- vanic skin response, heartbeat, and respin..- tory response measured by the device: In, a study conducted for the Air Force to deter- mine the role played by environmental stres in, the ability to detect lies,: the exper-- menters unexpectedly discovered another po- tential problem area. They found that the galvanic skin reactivity of an individual wee not predicated only upon environmental er situational circumstances producing ir..- creased perspiration and electrical conduc- tivity of the skin. Instead, it appeared thet these physical responses differed among in - dividuals, as recorded by the polygraph, in s way not accounted for in the experimenter:;' predictions. Further investigation seemed to point to biological, racially attributable diz- ferences as the reason" A related problem inherent in the poly- graph Best pertains to questions of cultural differences. It is generally recognized that values and moralities-honesty and truth- -- are, in part, culturally acquired; a serious Us in one person's view could, based on a dif- ferent personal experience and back-.rounc, be, in another's eye, inconsequential" This throws further suspicion on the validity of a technique which depends upon accepted notions of morality for its value. If the public were aware of the fallibility of the polygraph, would its effectiveness de- crease? An important feature of the exam - ination procedure, as previously explained, is the attempt to convince the subject of the machine's accuracy. Thus, as one author- ity notes, "Were the machine regarded a,, capable of error, fear of detection would b,a reduced, and this lowering of fear would re- suit in diminishing physiological response." e, One polygraph study concluded that the more a guilty subject could control his own attitudes and answers, the greater the con- tamination he could produce in the poly- graph results; an intelligent subject could often succeedin eluding detection." What is the examiner's influence in the polygraph procedure and results? Interpreta- tion is the essence of the process, making lie detecting a highly subjective business. Judg- ments about the subject's attitude and per- sonality, about the composition of questions, and regarding the meanings of the machine's recordings are all made by the examiner. The results presented are solely the assessment of an operator of the lines recorded on the graphs of his machine. The expertise re- quisite in making such interpretations raises several questions as to the reliability of polygraph reports. Familiarity with several medical specialties and an understanding of clinical and social- psychology should be re- quired and expected of examiners; yet, the curriculum should be required and expected of examiners; yet, the curriculum offered by a leading polygraph school, a program lauded by advocates as producing truly reputable examiners, amounts to a mere 244 hours of study with only 14 hours in psychology and 31 hours in "medical aspects." 52 Even the mere possession of an academic degree, un- less an advanced one in physiology or psy- chology, should not be enough qualifications Clearly, the level of most examiner compe- tence across the country, when the finest of the profession receive the minimal training noted here, falls far short of these criteria. Another consideration is the possibility that examiner bias will be injected into the test. There are examiners who sympathize with the employer who is seeking protection from thieving employees,TM who believe that most of the people who resist the tests are trying to hide something incriminating,&S and who maintain that the polygraph is an effective instrument for bringing out a per- son's compulsion to confess8e The chance for an unprejudiced examination and inter- pretation, with underlying examiner atti- tudes suchas these, greatly diminishes. With this number of potential trouble- spots involved, doubt must be cast upon the objectivity, accuracy, and reliability of the polygraph test. It has been noted that the acceptance of the machine is the product of circular logic: belief in the device induces confession, and the rate of confessions creates faith in the polygraph's effective- ness.5 In reality: "The polygrapth techniqueonly provides measures of various autonomic responses. The stimuli that elicit these responses, the intervening variables (constitutional predis- position, past learning, conscious and uncon- scious motivation, etc.) and the interpreta- tions made of the resulting graphs are highly complex and are Inferencesmade from more or less incomplete data." 58 THE POLYGRAPH TEST: CONSTITUTIONALITY The courts have been embroiled in the polygraph issue for a half-century, contend- ing with questions of reliability and, in re- lated contexts, with the deeper constitu- tional implications for individual rights. Reservations have - been expressed again and again concerning the admissibility of poly- graph results as evidence: (1) the jury's role would be undermined by a test purportedly as related to the determination of truth as the polygraph; (2) the test data offered by a defendant couldn't be cross-examined; (3) the problems of assuring that consent to be examined has been completely uncoerced are great; (4) with the polygraph usable as evi- dence, the presumption of innocence would certainly be damaged by a refusal to take the test; and (5) a polygraph exam could violate the privilege against self-incrimination, % as well as other constitutional provisions. These Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800130031-9 ..June 2,+1975 Approved ForC"y&?RffX/p2R P77 JA1iR000800130031-9 last considerations and concerns are also relevant to the use of polygraphs in em- ployment, where this method of investiga- tion threatens to violate the right to privacy possessed by every individual. The right to privacy is not one of the spe- cific guarantees enumerated in the Bill of Rights. Yet it has been recognized as an im- plicit right, intended by the Constitution and its framers, a result of the entwinement of express constitutional mandates and necessary to the preservation and viability of these liberties. In particular, the provisions of the First Amendment have been among those deemed related to the right to privacy. "The right of freedom of speech and press includes . freedom of thought .. Without those peri- pheral rights the specific rights would be less secure." 99 Freedom in our thoughts and beliefs has been long acknowledged as being within the First Amendment freedom of speech. In Palko v. Connecticut 91 this point was clearly stated: "Of that freedom [of thought, and speech] one may say that it is the matrix, the in- dispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom. With rare aberrations a pervasive recognition of that truth can be traced in our history, political and legal. So it has come about that the domain of liberty, withdrawn by the Fourteenth Amendment. from encroachment by the states, has been enlarged by latter-day judgments to include liberty of the mind as well as liberty of action. The extension became, indeed, a logi- cal imperative when once it was recognized as long aso as it was, that liberty is some- thing more than exemption from physical restraints..." 12 Freedom of thought, then, has been held to be a fundamental right. In fact the con- nection between liberty of thought and the right to keep those thoughts private is in- escapable. Griswold v. Connecticut"' is a landarmk Supreme Court case upholding the consti- tutionality of this right of privacy. The Court stated that, along with the other amend- ments, "the First Amendment has a penum- bra where privacy is protected from govern- mental Intrusion." 84 In a concurring opinion, Justice Goldberg urged that privacy does not have to be in- ferred from enumerated' freedoms. Instead, the Ninth Amendment can be turned to, for it "simply shows the intent of the Consti- tution's authors that other fundamental per- sonal rights should not be denied such pro- tection or disparaged in any other way simply because they are not specifically listed in the first eight constitutional amendments." cn Justice Goldberg went on to say that in deciding what rights are fundamental we must examine our traditions to discover the principles rooted there. In Griswold, the con- troversy revolved around the marriage re- lationship and the privacy traditionally ac- corded its intimacies. The Court declared, "We deal with a right to privacy older than the Bill of Rights..." 86 Certainly the right to privacy in our minds, to speak or keep silent about our thoughts, is one of the old- est and most basic principles of human in- dividuality and life. Such a valued tradition should not be. tampered with for reasons of alleged expediency. Though the Griswold decision focused on the right to privacy as peripheral to First Amendment rights, it was noted that other constitutional guarantees manifest this same purpose: "The Fourth Amendment explicitly af- firms the 'right of the people of be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable. searches and seizures.' The Fifth Amendment in its Self-Incrimina- tion Clause enables the citizen to create a Footnotes at end of article. zone of privacy which government may not force him to surrender to his detriment." 17 Boyd v. United States " recognized that in questions of privacy the Fourth and Fifth Amendments are closely tied, as explained in - a.passage frojn the Court's opinion: "The principles laid down in this opinion [of Lord Camden] affect the very essence of constitutional liberty and security . they apply to all invasions on the part of the gov- ernment and its employers, of the sanctity of a man's home and the privacies of life. It is not the breaking of his doors and the rum- maging of his drawers that constitutes the essence of the offense; but it is the invasion of his indefeasible right of personal security, personal liberty and private property where that right has never been forfeited by his conviction of some public offense . . . any forcible and compulsory extortion of a man's own testimony or of his private papers to be used as evidence to convict him of a crime or to forfeit his goods is within the condemna- tion of that judgment [of Lord Camden]. In this regard the Fourth and Fifth Amend- ments run almost into each other." 0? Several of the points made in Boyd can be related to the issues of a federal employee's rights, to the nature of'the self-incrimina- tion and unreasonable search and seizure protections outside of criminal proceedings. Clearly, the Constitution does not limit these guarantees to a criminal context. In the land- mark decision Miranda -v. Arizona,79 in which guidelines were first set forth for the ques- tioning of suspects to secure the Fifth Amendment protection, the Supreme Court maintained that "the privilege is fulfilled only when the person is guaranteed the right 'to remain silent unless he chooses to speak in the unfettered exercise of his own will' " 71 The Court further noted that, "Today; then, there can be no doubt that the Fifth Amend- ment privilege is available outside of crimi- nal court proceedings and serves to protect persons in all settings in which their freedom of action is curtailed from being compelled to incriminate themselves." 72 These tenets of Boyd and Miranda are in- deed relevant to employment situations and polygraph-induced confession even- though -the purpose of such tests Is not to elicit in- criminating evidence for a court. Congres- sional hearings into the use of polygraphs in federal employment determined that: "The polygraph technique forces an indi- vidual to incriminate himself and confess to past actions which are not pertinent to the current investigation. He must dredge up his past so he can approach the polygraph ma- chine with an untroubled soul. The poly- graph operator and his superiors then decide whether to refer derogatory information to other agencies or officials." " The concern in Miranda was to compensate for the coercive aura of a police station to insure that all precautions- are taken so that a suspect does not feel compelled to speak. Where obtaining or retaining a job is de- pendent upon the taking of a polygraph test, the environment can be just as coercive. Em- ployment is vital to existence and survival in our modern society, and the competition for jobs is great. The submission to polygraph examinations is pre-employment interviews is deemed voluntary, but the knowledge that a refusal will automatically end the em- ployment opportunity undermines this claim. Furthermore, the onus of guilt, of hiding potentially damaging revelations that accom- panies a refusal to be tested by a polygraph further reduces the voluntary aspect. Many job offers are conditioned upon an agree- ment to submit to future polygraph tests, entirely eliminating any element of choice. For a person seeking or obtaining a job to be coerced to reveal private knowledge, thoughts, and beliefs would appear repug- nant to Supreme Court cases which recog- nize the constitutional rights of employees" S -9141 The price of gaining employment must not be a surrendering of civil liberties. The polygraph examiner's questions them- selves can be extremely coercive resulting from "the subject's defensive willingness to elaborate on his answers because he fears that unless he reveals all the details, the ma- chine will record that he is lying even when his basic story is true." 75 Freedom from be- ing compelled to make self-incriminating disclosures, a part of every citizen's right to privacy, should be applicable to a business setting, expecially where polygraphs are in use, for, as one commentator summarizes: . the nature of an employer's inquiries about past deeds.and guilt is often indistin- guishable from criminal interrogation. More- over, the?loss of personal liberty or property which would result from a criminal convic- tion is often no more significant than the denial of livelihood which may result from compelled testimony concerning past and present activities, associations, and even be- liefs during preemployment or promotion screening via personality and polygraph test- mg 78? Another matter germane to the self-in- crimination discussion is the question of how the responses elicited by the polygraph machine and examiner are characterized. In response to the growing complex of investi- gative techniques available for the identify- ing of a suspect in a criminal case, a distinc- tion has emerged between physical as op- posed to communicative evidence. Thus, a person may be compelled to provide a sam- ple of his handwriting, 77 to speak," or to ex- hibit his body for identification,79 but he may not be expected to be a source of testimonial evidence against himself. In Schmerber v. California," in which the Court held that the taking of a blood sample over petitioner's objections did not violate constitutional re- quirements, the polygraph was discussed in relation to the difficulties inherent in the process of separating physical evidence from communications. The opinion noted: "Some tests seemingly directed to obtain 'physical evidence,' for example, lie detector tests measuring changes in body function during interrogation, may actually be di- rected to eliciting responses which are essen- tially testimonial. To compel a person to submit to testing in which an effort will be made to determine his guilt or innocence on the basis of physiological responses, whether willed or not, is to evoke the spirit and his- tory of the Fifth Amendment." al The technique applied to extract informa- tion from an Individual must, also be weighed against Fourth Amendment con- siderations. Methods for obtaining evidence, though in theory permissible, must, the Court has held, adhere to other principles as well as strict constitutional ones. In Rochin v. California," the Court deemed it proper to refer to the sense of the community in de- termining whether drugs obtained from a forced stomach pumping could be used to achieve a conviction. The opinion concluded that "conduct that shocks the conscience" must be prohibited: "They are methods too close to the rack and the screw to permit of constitutional differentiation."" The Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures does not apply merely to criminal matters. "It is surely anomalous to say that the individual and his private property are fully protected by the Fourth Amendment only when the individual is suspected of criminal beha- vior." 84 In dissenting from a 1928 opinion upholding the constitutionality of wiretaps, Justice Brandeis, gazing into the future, pre- dicted and worried that: "Advances in the psychic and related sci- ences may bring means of exploring unex- pressed beliefs, thoughts and emotions . . Can it. be that the Constitution affords no protection against such invasions of individ- ual security?' Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800130031-9 S 9142 Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800130031-9 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE June 2, 1975 The Fourth Amendment has now been rec- ognized as applying to more than simple physical trespass 8 Electronic listening de- vices,aT police "stop-and-frisk" procedures,'" the taking of fingernail scrapings 80 all have come under its purview. The retention of an individual's privacy, in the face of ever in- creasing odds against It, Is obviously a sig- nificant concern. Courts have found it to be their legitimate duty to protect this funds- mental principle, as set forth in Mapp v. Ohio: N "We find that as to the federal govern- ment, the Fourth and Fifth Amendments and, as to the states, the freedom from un- conscionable invasions of privacy and the freedom from convictions based on coerced confessions do enjoy an "intimate relation" In their perpetuation of "principles of hu- manity and civil liberty [secured] only after years of struggle." 91 In the staff's view, polygraphs used in employment indisputably fall within the areas of constitutional concern presented here. To many knowledgeable commentators the relationship is evident' To be probed and questioned so deeply, to be expected to reveal personal attitudes and beliefs under conditions such as those imposed by poly- graph testing, is to be subjected to searches and seizures that are unreasonable, to co- erced self-incrimination, to loss of civil lib- erties that amount to a true invasion of privacy. FOOTNOTES Ibid., pp. 699-700. Ibid., p. 704. Ibid., p. 705. ACLU Report, p. 4. * Skolnick, op. cit., pp. 704 and 705. A ACLU Report, p. 5. I' Burkey, op. cit., p. 81. ,,Martin T. Orne and Richard I. Thackery, "Methodological Studies in Detection of De- ception," distributed by the Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Informa- tion, Dept. of Commerce. 1 Ibid., summary. Ibid. Frank S. Horvath and John E. Reid, "The Reliability of Polygraph Examiner Diagnosis of Truth and Deception," The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, vol. 62, 1971, p. 276. =4 Ibid., p. 278. '5 Ibid., p. 281. Ibid, p. 278. X Skolnik, op. cit., p. 699. Ibid., p. 715. q Ibid., p. 715. Ibid., pp. 717-718. 4t1 Hearings, pp. 10-11 Ibid., pp. 12-13. z H. B. Dearman, M.D. and B. M. Smith, Ph.D., "Unconscious Motivation and the Polygraph Test," The American Journal of Psychiatry, May 1963, p. 1019. 14 Skolnick, op. cit., p. 701. 1Ibid., p. 700. 1r, Dearman and Smth, op. at., pp. 1017- 1018. 19 Equal Employment Opportunity Commis- sion brief related in Circle K. Corp. v. EEOC., 11.S.Ct. of Appeals, 10th Circuit, case No. 72- 1967, p. 8 (hereinafter cited as EEOC brief). 17 S. Kugelmass, "Effect of Three Levels of Realistic Stress On Differential Psychological Reactivities," report for the Air Force Office of Scientific Research. Ibid., pp. 22-23. EEOC, brief, p. 7. Skolnick, op. cit., p. 705. ?t Joseph F. Kubis, "Studies In Lie Detec- tion," report for the Air Force Systems Com- mand, N.Y. June 1982. as Skolnick, op. cit., p. 707. Burkey, op. cit., p. 87. Pete J. Perras, "Polygraph Invaluable Tool," The Charlotte Observer, July 6, 1971. fib Franklin, loc. cit. ae Ibid. w Ibid. "Dearman and Smith, op. cit., p. 1019, w' Howard S. Altarescu, "Problems Remaai,r- ing for the 'Generally Accepted' Poi;- graph," 53 Boston Univ. L. Rev. 375 (1973) , p. 376. 60 Griswold v. Connecticut, -381 U.S.' 479 (1965). pp. 482-483. a' 302 U.S. 319 (1937) 'Ibid., p. 327. For other related discus- sious see Abrams v. U.S., 250 U.S. 616 (1919), Holmes dissent; Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927), Brandeis concurrence. 381 U.S. 479 (1965). 41 bid., p. 483. Ibid., Goldberg concurrence, p. 492. For another discussion of privacy see Poe v. U71- man, 367 U.S. 497 (1961), Harlan dissent. w Ibid., p. 486. 61 Ibid., p. 484. aa116 U.S. 616 (1885). Ibid., p. 630. 70 384 US. 436 (1966). ' Ibid., p. 460, quoting Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1 (1964). 72 Ibid., p. 467. Tz Hearings, pp. 19-20. 74 See Slochower v. Board of Education, 350 U.S. 551 (1955) ; Garrity v. New Jersey, 885 U.S. 493 (1968); Keyishian v. Board of BQ- gents, 385 U.S. 589 (1967). T ACLU Report, p. 35. Ta Hermann, op. cit., p. 131. TT Gii:bert v. California, 388 U.S. 263 (1967). 71 U.S. v. Dionisio, 93 S. Ct. 764 (1973). T? U.S. v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (1967). b0 381 U.S. 757 (1966). '" Ibid., p. 764. " 342 U.S. 165 (1952). as Ibid., p. 172. Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523 (1966), p.530. m Olmstead, Brandeis dissent, p. 474. Katz. v. U.S., 389 U.S. 347 (1967). 1T Ibid. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). Cupp v. Murphy, 412 U.S. 291 (1973). B0367 U.S. 643 (1961). 01Ibid., p. 657, quoting Bram v. U.S., 168 U.S. 532 (1897). B2 See ACLU Report and Hermann. Mr. BAYH. Finally, it is not mere rhes,- oric, Mr. President, but a painful fact that the procedures used in taking poi?- graphs far too strikingly resemble some- thing from George Orwell's "1984." The prospective job applicant or employee is situated in a waiting room to be observs'd through a one-way mirror by the exalal- iner who attempts to ascertain the in- dividual's initial reaction to the entire procedure. A polygraphist enters and proceeds to ask seemingly innocuous con- trol questions which assist him in deter- mining the type of individual he is deal- ing with. At the appropriate time, the pneumograph tube-to measure respir.s,- tion--1s placed about the subject's chest, the blood pressure cuffs--sphygmom7- ter-are secured around the upper arms and electrodes are attached to the arms and hands. Tension is accentuated b?-- cause a job and future, and much more, are at stake. I do not believe, Mr. Presi- dent, that any American should be sub- jected to this degrading procedure. I ask unanimous consent that the con- clusions of the subcommittee staff study, together with the` text of the bill be printed in the RECORD. There being no objection, the material and bill were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: THE POLYGRAPH TEST: CONCLUSIONS A congressional subcommittee has con- eluded: "There is no 'lie detector,' neither machine nor human. People have been deceived by a myth that a metal box in the hands of an Investigator can detect truth or falsehood." But whether or not the polygraph is a myth, it seems clear that it is here to stay. And, given modern ingenuity, it is not un- reasonable to expect that new techniques and devices will be devised in an attempt to facilitate determining honesty. There are, in fact, some already in use, The "wiggle seat" is a new contraption for lie detecting derived from the original polygraph. It, too, meas-. ures and records physiological changes due to heart action and a person's nervous move- ments, but with an added advantage over the polygraph. The wiggle seat's sensing is mounted in an ordinary office chair. A sub- ject sitting in the chair has his mechanical energy changed to electrical energy which is broadcast to hidden recording instruments. Thus, the response detectioncan go on com- pletely without the subject's knowledge. Another type of examination that is gain- ing acceptance in American business is the Psychological Stress Evaluator (PSE) ua The PSE registers the FM vibrations In a person's voice. The premise Is that under stress the FM modulation is altered due to mouth and throat tightening. A graphic picture of the voice's modulations is made, and the pres- ence and absence of stress are judged accord- ing to the character of the markings. The obtaining of the conversation to be assessed can be done secretively with the use of hid- den tape recorders. The questions posed by this method are the same as those that critics of the polygraph have been raising, and pro- ponents have been trying to refute, for years. Can the stress in a person's voice be directly attributed to lying? Can the evalu- ator objectively and accurately detect lies from physiological recordings of the voice? What of the constitutional problems of test- ing a speaker without his knowledge, so easily accomplished by the PSE technique? These two innovations indicate that rather than being curtailed, use of the polygraph is being expanded, particularly in private busi- ness. Attitudes of employers, insofar as poly- graph testing is concerned, are characterized in the following: "If a person refused to take the test, we probably wouldn't hire him." 117 "I use the polygraph because I got tired of playing God. It's hard to tell things by looking at people" t5 Even a U.S. Court of Appeals has lent its approval to polygraph testing: "A statement challenged on the ground that it was obtained [from a polygraph ex- amination administered to petitioner as a part of a hiring procedure] as the result of economic sanctions must be rejected as in- voluntary only where the pressure reasonably appears to have been of sufficiently appreci- able size and substance to deprive the ac- cused of his "free choice to admit, to deny, or to refuse an answer" ... But the threat of discharge for a job as a driver's assistant, which Sanney had held for one or two days, can hardly be labelled a "substantial eco- nomic sanction" rendering his statement in- voluntary." vA These comments indicate that if poly- graphs are here to stay, so, in fact, are the constitutional problems inherent in their use. The right to privacy is basic to the Ameri- can way of life and recognized as inherent in and guaranteed by the constitutional provi- sions of the First, Fourth and Fifth Amend- ments. The federal government ordinarily strives to curtail and prevent infringements of individual rights such as these. But the polygraph, as a tool of public and private Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800130031-9 T~A,r~,P 2. 1.9 .5 Approved Fo ROele 0~ Al /~0:~.ECJ P _ K OAVf R000800130031-9 employers, clearly demands more attention. Compulsory submission to a polygraph test is an affront to the integrity of the human personality that is unconscionable in a soci- ety which values the retention of individuals' privacy.'Employers have a multitude of less objectionable resources at their disposal for investigating applicants' backgrounds and employees' performances. Expediency is not a valid reason for pitting individuals against a degrading machine and process that pry into their inner thoughts. Limits, beyond which invasions of privacy will not be tol- erated, must be established. The Congress should take legislative steps to prevent Fed- eral agencies as well as the private sector from requiring, requesting, or persuading any employee or applicant for employment to take any polygraph test. Privacy Is a fun- damental right that must be protected by prohibitive legislation from such unwar- ranted invasions. FOOTNOTES ua Fred P. Graham, "Lie Detecting By a Voice Is Center of Controversy," New York Times, June 5, 1972, p. 1. . 117 Bill Bradley of Eckerd Corp. quoted in "To Catch A Thief," Newsweek, Sept. 23, 1974, p. 80. us St. Petersburg, Fla. Chevrolet dealer quoted In "To Catch A Thief," Newsweek, Ibid. ne From a Court of Appeals opinion, Sanney v. Montanye, 6/20/74, reported in The United States Law Week, 43 LW 2027, 7-23-74. S. 1841 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That (a) chapter 13, of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new section: "? 246. Polygraph testing in connection with employment "(a) For purposes of this section," the term- "(1) 'polygraph test' means an examina- tion administered to an individual by me- chanical or electrical means to measure or otherwise examine the veracity or truthful- ness of such individual; and "(2) 'employee organizations' includes any brotherhood, council, federation, organiza- tion, union, or professional organization made up in whole or in part of employees and which has as one of its purposes dealing with departments, agencies, commissions, inde- pendent agencies of the United States, or with businesses and industries engaged in or affecting interstate commerce, concern- ing the conditionA and terms of employment of such employees. "(b) (1) Any officer or employee or per- son acting for or on behalf of the United States who willfully- "(A) permits, requires, or requests, or at- tempts to require or request, any officer or employee of the United States, or any in- dividual applying for employment as an officer or employee of the United States, to take any polygraph test in connection with his services or duties as an officer, or em- ployee, or in connection with such individ- ual's application for employment; or "(B) denies employment to any individ- ual, or discharges, disciplines, or denies pro- motion to any officer or employee of the United States, or threatens to commit any such act by reason of his refusal or failure to submit to such requirement or request, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and pun- ished by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both. "(2) Any person engaged in any business or other activity in or affecting interstate commerce, or any individual acting under the authority of such person who willfully- "(A) permits, requires, or requests, or attempts to require or request any individ- ual employed by such person or any individ. ual applying for employment in connection with such business or activity to take any polygraph test in connection with his serv- ices or duties or in connection with his application, for employment; or "(B) who denies employment to any in- dividual, or discharges, disciplines, or denies promotion to any individual employed in connection with such business or activity, or threatens to commt such act by reason of his refusal or failure to submit to such re- quirement or .request, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and pun- ished by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both. "(c) (1) Whenever- "(A) any officer or employee or any person acting for or on behalf of the United States, "(B) any person engaged in any business or other activity in or affecting interstate commerce, or any individual acting under the authority of such person, violates or threatens to violate any of the provisions of subsection (b) of this section, any employee or officer of the United States, or any person applying for"employment in the executive 'branch of the United States Government, or any individual seeking to establish civil service status or eligibility for employment in the United States Govern- ment, or any individual applying for employ- ment in connection with any business or ac- tivity engaged in or affecting interstate com- merce, or any individual employed by a per- son engaged in such business or activity, who is affected c- aggrieved by the violation or threatened violation, may bring a civil action in his own behalf or in behalf of himself and others similarly situated, against the offend- ing officer or employee or person in the United States District Court for the district in which the violation occurs or is threatened, or for the district in which the offending person is found, or in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, to pre- vent the threatened violation or to obtain redress against the consequences of the vio- lation. "(2) The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction to try and determine such civil action irrespective of the actuality or amount of pecuniary in- jury done or threatened, and without re- gard to whether the aggrieved party shall have exhausted any administrative remedies that may be provided by law, and to issue such restraining order, interlocutory injunc. tion, permanent injunction, or mandatory injunction, or enter such other judgment or decree as may be necessary or appropriate to prevent the threatened violation, or to afford the plaintiff and others similarly situ- ated complete relief against the consequences of the violation. "(3) With the written consent of any per- son affected or aggrieved by a violation or threatened violation of subsection (b) of this section, any employee organization may bring such action on behalf of any such person, or may intervene in such action." (b) The analysis of chapter 13 of such title Is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new item: "246. Polygraph testing in connection with employment." SEC. 2. The amendments made by this Act shall become effective thirty days after the date of enactment. ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS OF BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS S. 334 At the request of Mr. HATHAWAY, the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KEN- NEDY) was added as a cosponsor of S. 334, S 9143 a bill to prohibit sex discrimination by educational institutions whose primary purpose is the training of individuals for the military service of the United States. S. 1000 At the request of Mr. HUGH SCOTT (for Mr. MAGNUSON), the Senator from Ore- gon (Mr. HATFIELD) was added as a co- sponsors of S. 1000, a bill to prohibit the Consumer Product Safety Commission from restricting the sale or manufacture of firearms or ammunition. S. 1153 At the request of Mr. MONDALE, the Senator from Nevada (Mr. LAXALT) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1153, the Truth in Contributions Act. S. 1625 At the request of Mr. PACKWOOD, the Senator from Arizona (Mr. GOLDWATER), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. HOLLINGS), and the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. MORGAN) were added as cosponsors of S. 1625, a bill to extend and revise the State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972. 8. 1776 At the request of Mr. HUGH SCOTT, the Senator from Montana (Mr. MANSFIELD) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1776, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to establish the Valley Forge National Historical Park in the Coin- monwealth of Pennsylvania., and for other purposes. S. 1801 At the request of Mr. TAFT, the Sena- tor from South Carolina (Mr; THUR- MOND) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1801, a bill to provide an. alternative plan for providing essential rail services to the Midwest and Northeast regions of the United States, to modernize certain railroad procedures, and for other pur- poses. SENATE RESOLUTION 158 At the request of Mr. PACKWOOD, the Senator from Alaska (Mr. STEVENS), the Senator from Michigan (Mr. PHILIP A. HART), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. CUL- VER), the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. FORD), and the Senator from Pennsyl- vania (Mr. SCHWEIKER) were added as cosponsors of Senate Resolution 158, a resolution to express the sense of the Senate that the income tax rebates should not- be subject to State income tax. SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 63 At the request of Mr. PERCY, the Sena- tor from New Mexico (Mr. DOMENICI) was added as a cosponsor of Senate Joint Resolution 63, to authorize the President to designate the period from June 8, 1975, through June 15, 1975, as "National Wheelchair Athletes' Week." SENATE RESOLUTION 172-ORIGI- NAL RESOLUTION REPORTED RE- LATING TO THE, PAYMENT OF WITNESS FEES (Place on the Calendar.) Mr. CANNON, from the Committee on Rules and Administration, reported the following resolution: S. RES. 172 Resolved, That witnesses summoned to ap- pear before the Senate or any of Its com- Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800130031-9 9144 Approved For Rgl pl g 1 L Ci g7MQ1 ~~00800130031-9 June 2, 1975 mittees shall be entitled to a witness fee rated at not to exceed $35 for each full day spent in traveling to and from the place of examination and for each full day in attend- ance. A witness shall also be entitled to re- imbursement of the actual and necessary transportation expenses incurred by him in traveling to and from the place of examina- tion, in no case to exceed 35 cents a mile for the distance actually traveled by him for the purpose of appearing as a witness if such distance is not more than six hundred miles or 20 cents a mile if such distance is more than six hundred miles. AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED FOR PRINTING AUTHORIZATION OF CERTAIN CON- STRUCTION AT MILITARY IN- STALLATIONS--S. 1247 AMENDMENT NO. 490 (Ordered to be printed and to lie on the table.) TRANSFER OF SURPLUS ARMY LAND TO AUGUSTA COLLEGE Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, this amend- ment is identical to S. 3834, which I sub- mitted on July 30, 1974. It authorizes the transfer of a 5-acre parcel of land from the Department of the Army to Augusta College in Augusta, Ga. The dis- tinguished senior Senator from Georgia, Senator TALMADGE, joins me as a cospon- sor of this amendment. Congressman ROBERT STEPHENS, who represents Geor- gia's 10th Congressional District, and Congressman JACK BRINKLEY, who rep- resents Georgia's Third Congressional District, have introduced legislation in the House of Representatives as H.R. 4018 to accomplish this transfer. The purpose of this amendment is to facilitate the transfer of the land which is desired by both parties to the trans- action. Provision is made in this meas- ure for the payment of full market value. There are no other competing claims to the land, and no objections to the con- veyance have been voiced from any quarter. By authorizing the Secretary of the Army to make the transfer directly to the board of regents of the University of Georgia for Augusta College, the bill is merely intended to simplify, accelerate, and assure completion of the transfer. This amendment represents the com- pletion of a process of negotiation and cooperation which goes back nearly 4 years when the first request by the col- lege for the Army site adjacent to the school was made. In fact, the story be- gins nearly 20 years ago. At that time, in 1955, about 70 acres of property occupied by the Augusta Ar- mory was declared surplus by the Army and acquired by the Richmond County Board of Education. Excluded from that transaction by the Army were approxi- mately 5 acres at a corner of the tract. On this land in 1957 the Army built the present U.S. Reserve Armory, which has since served as a reserve training cen- a 1958 the board of education trans- ferred the main body of the armory prop- erty to the board of regents of the Uni- versity of Georgia for use by Augusta College. That same year Augusta Col- lege, then a small junior college with a history dating back to 1783, became a unit of the State university system. The college and its new site under' 'ent a remarkable growth and development in the succeeding 15 years. The college was transformed from a junior college Into a senior institution offering, first, a bac- calaureate program and, subsequently, graduate programs as well. Enrolls rent grew from less than 450 students in 1958 to over 4,000 students in 1975, drawn from throughout the Central Savannah River area of Georgia and South Caro- lina. The State of Georgia spent over $10 million to refurbish existing structures and add new facilities, develdpin-!: it campus which today has a replacen.:ent value of over $30 million. In short, .o a decade and a half, Augusta College has grown nine fold into a truly important community asset and a valuable State facility serving a broad and expanding area as an essential educational resource. Anticipating that continued growth could push enrollment beyond the 6,000 mark by 1980 and recognizing that p.-op- erty for expansion was virtually nnl3ex- istentin the college's land-locked resi- dential area, Augusta College officials first. turned to the Army for help with its expansion in 1971. The college asked that the adjacent 5 acre armory and training center site be transferred to it to help relieve the space problems. The Army was sympathetic to the col- lege request. In fact, it was finding the 5-acre site smaller than it needed for its own expansion plans for the training center, but It had no suitable alternate site available. Thus began a cooperative effort extending to the present to ind a mutually acceptable solution to the joint problem of relocation. I do not intend to recount the efforts that have been required over the last 4 years to find the happy answer. Su ice it to say that it has been found through the determined efforts of the college under its able president, Dr. George Christenberry; through the unstin ;ing cooperation of the Army, locally and in Washington; through the understanding and support of local and State officials and the assistance of Federal agencies; and with a boost where needed from the distinguished Senator from Georgia, Senator TALMADGE, from our esteemed colleague from South Carolina, Senator TlIITRMOND, Congressman STEPHENS, Con- gressman BRINKLEY, and my own (f tce. The Army now has a fine site in Au- gusta on which to relocate its' expanded reserve training center. Augusta Col`ege is moving ahead with plans to utilize the present site, and the transfer has been endorsed by all Interested parties. The board of regents of the University Sys item of Georgia has committed itself to ex- pend funds to purchase the tract of land from the Army whenever congressivinal approval is obtained. Hence, the next step required is ena ct- ment of the authorizing legislation I am. submitting today. I recommend pas??ge of this amendment as consonant v.-ith the best interests of the Departmen; of Defense, the University System of Geor- gia, Augusta College and Richm-ind County, Ga., residents. I hope that the legislative wheels will roll smooothly and rapidly to passage so that we may soon set the seal of Federal approval on this fine example of cooperation, civilian and military, local, State and Federal. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- sent that this amendment be printed In the RECORD, There being no objection, the amend- ment was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: AMENDMENT No. 499 At the end of the bill, insert the following: TITLE IX SEC. 901. The Secretary of the Army is au- thorized and directed to convey to the Board of Regents of the University System of Geor- gia, subject to the provisions of this Act, all of the right, title, and interest of the United States in and to a parcel of land, with im- provements thereon, lying and being situ- ated in Richmond County, city of Augusta, State of Georgia, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a chiseled $ in concrete at the intersection of the south line of Walton Way with the west line of Katherine Street; thence along the west line of Katherine Street, south 02 degrees 27 minutes 55 sec- onds west 288.29 feet to a point 1 foot south of a cyclone fence; thence along a line 1foot south of and parallel to a cyclone fence, north 85degrees 31 minutes 15 seconds west 227.32 feet to a point 1 foot east of a cyclone fence; thence along a line parallel to and 1 foot east of a cyclone fence, south 04 de- grees 19 minutes 50 seconds west 233.05 feet to a point; thence along a line 1 foot south of and parallel to- a cyclone fence, north 85 degrees 19 minutes 27 seconds west 306.74 feet to a point 0.60 foot west of a cyclone fence; thence along a line parallel to and 0.60 foot west of a cyclone fence, north 04 degrees 59 minutes 48 seconds east 520.23 feet to a concrete monument on the south side. of Walton Way; thence along the south side of Walton Way, south 85 degrees 30 min- utes 15 seconds east 517,62 feet to the point of beginning, and containing 5.09 acres, more or less. SEC. 2. The conveyance authorized by this Act shall be made upon payment to the United States of not less than the appraised fair market value of the land and the im- provements thereon, as determined by the Secretary of the Army, or the sum of $662,000, whichever is the greater, and upon such terms, conditions, reservations, and restric- tions as the Secretary of the Army shall deem necessary to protect the interests of the United States. SEC. 3. The, money received by the United States for the lands conveyed under this Act shall be credited to a special account in the Treasury and shall be available, without fiscal year limitation, for the construction of a United States Army Reserve Training Cen- ter on lands owned by the United States at the intersection of Jackson and Wrightsboro Roads, Augusta, Georgia. SEC. 4. The cost of any surveys necessary as an incident to the conveyance authorized by tbis Act shall be borne by the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AU- THORIZATION ACT-S. 920 AMENDMENTS NOS. 500 AND 501 (Ordered to be printed and lie on the table.) - Mr. PROXMIRE submitted two amendments intended to be proposed by him to the bill (S. 920) to authorize ap- propriations during the fiscal year 1976, and the period of July 1, 1976, through September 30, 1976, for procurement of Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800130031-9 July 28, 1975 Appro lqQ;IfAg&Fil~NA?0 Q&Ep]A i7s7 90$4 MQ 130031-9 E 4199 of the offense and of the fine, whereupon he can pay personally or by mail, or petition the district court for judicial review. When a driver commits an administrative offense, and as a result causes an accident which produces personal or property damage, the administrative offense becomes a misde- meancr, and the driver becomes liable to criminal prosecution. The results of this new method or, dealing with traffic violations will be closely followed to determine the desirability of extending it to other criminal offenses of the traffic law. Among the most important amendments to the rules of criminal procedure are the fol- lowing: The need to corroborate an accomplice's testimony was eliminated; the rule requir- ing corroboration of the prosecutrix's testi- mony in cases of rape was changed. Puerto Rico's obsolete Penal Code of 1902 was repealed, and a new code was approved recognizing the duel function of punishment as a means of retribution, deterrence, and re- habilitation and establishing new crimes in accordance with modern times. To expedite judicial proceedings the post of Public Prosecuting Attorney for the Dis- trict court legel was created and the "de novo trial" was eliminated. Rules to govern police line-up and photography proceedings were adopted. The commencement of a trial in the ab- sence of a defendant validly summoned in arraignment was authorized, permitting the impanelling of the jury, the presentation of evidence, and the return of the verdict with- out the defendant's presence. To maintain order when a defendant's conduct tends to interrupt judicial proceedings, the Act also authorizes: (a) contempt proceedings; (b) adoption of any other pertinent coercive measures; (c) defendant's removal from the courtroom. Pretrial conferences were established, to aid in reducing controversies and in plan- ning court calendars; To shorten voir dire proceedings, jurors' preliminary examina- tions will now be conducted by the judge. An amendment was introduced permitting the substitution of another judge for a disabled judge in a criminal trial .in any phase prior to the verdict. Criteria for the imposition of bail and a swift procedure for the revision of the amount of bail were enacted. Various acts were approved relating to cor- rectional reform. One act created an au- tonomous agency to direct correctional poli- cy and administer the correctional system. In the civil area, amendments were intro- duced to ex-parte proceedings relating to declaration of heirship, amendments or addi- tions to documents filed in the general regis- try of vital statistics, and waiver of consan- guinity for marriages, eliminating the need of judicial hearings except on the court's ini- tiative or upon motion by a party. To reduce the cost of legal proceedings, the attorney's contingent fee in tort cases was limited. In addition, compensation to a public official or employee for his judicial appearance or testimony as regular or expert witness, was, restricted. The integrated reform of the Puerto Rican system of justice as described in this article shows that the three branches of government can-without. overlapping their respective, autonomous powers-successfully coordinate public and private resources to revise the system of law. But reform is a continuous process. To complement the vast legislation enacted, the Justice Department and the Office of Court Administration are sponsoring island-wide seminars to explain the new acts to judges, prosecutors, lawyers and other members of the community. The Bar Association is con- tributing to these activities. The council's work continues. Recently three more reports were filed by the commis- sions on labor law, civil law and the office of the public prosecutor. More reports are ex- pected soon. The Supreme Court and the Chief Justice, are enacting new administra- tive rules and norms for the courts, and a new judiciary act is being considered. All those who are participating in the process of revitalizing Puerto Rico's system of law share a firm personal conviction that Aristotle's conception of justice as the high- est and most valuable human virtue is an attainable goal when duly administered by diligent, prudent, moral, patient and im- partial judges. Then only, will we be closer to Roscoe Pound's prophetic vision " . of a future when our courts will be swift and certain agents of justice, whose decisions will be acquiesced in and respected by all." ROMANIA's OPPRESSED HUNGAR- IAN MINORITY OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, July 28, 1975 Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Speaker, I wish to indicate that, while I intend to vote. for House Concurrent Resolution 252, I have some strong reservations about it. I was a cosponsor of House Concurrent Resolution 326, which is not now before us because of the promises of the As- sistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, Arthur A. Hartman, before the International Relations Committee's Subcommittee on Trade, which I hope will be lived up to. . It would be a mockery of our traditions of freedom to strive for close relations with Romania without making it clear that we condemn the present treatment meted out to ethnic and religious minor- ities in that country, which compares un- favorably even with that, of the other countries of East Central Europe which have Communist governments. Many de- tailed cases of oppression and harrass- ment were presented during the subcom- mittee's hearings, showing the systematic campaign being conducted against the Along with this domestic oppression, Ro- mania, as well as against Roman Catholic and Protestant groups in the country. Along with this domestic oppression, Ru- mania has a dismal record in respect to allowing the relatives of U.S. citizens to emigrate to the United States. Under these circumstances our votes in favor of House Concurrent Resolution 252 should not be misconstrued as ap- proval of Romanian policies and we re- serve the right to raise the issue again after the 18-month waiver period expires, unless redress is given to the minorities in Rumania. Thirty-nine Members of the House, in- cluding myself, petitioned the President last Friday to make sure that the State Department follows through on its prom- ise and asked that he raise the issue in his talks with President Ceaucescu dur- ing his current European visit. We hope that he will listen to our concerned voices so that detente with Romania will not 4 Pound, Roscoe: The Causes of Popular Dissatisfaction with the Administration of Justice; 40 American L. Rev. 729 (1906), re- printed, 46 J. Am. Jud. Soc. 65 (1962). become tantamount to abandonment of our humanitarian concern for the hu- man and civil rights of people every- where. TITLE: SOLVING OUR ENERGY PROBLEMS HON. SHIRLEY N. PETTIS OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, July 28, 1975 Mrs. PETTIS. Mr. Speaker, the time has come for Congress to realize that there is no easy way out of or around our energy problems. We cannot just wave a magical wand and make the oil crisis get better or go away. We hear much talk about the economic impact of the President's program to de- control "old oil" over a period of 30 months because it is "politically expedi- ent" for some of us to continue deluding our constituents into thinking that there is a cheap, painless way out of this pre- dicament. We must stop telling the American people that energy can be available inexpensively when we know the contrary to be true. We must stop the rhetoric and begin offering construc- tive and comprehensive ways to solve our energy problems instead of blindly pur- suing courses which perpetuate them. Mr. Speaker, I offer the following edi- torial from the Christian Science Moni- tor as one more piece of convincing evi- dence, that the majority in Congress is only deluding itself by pursuing the leg- islative course which it has decided to follow: From the Christian Science Monitor, July 23, 1976 ] FORD'S HANDLE ON OIL Democrats in Congress may be winning points with the public in their battle with President Ford over oil prices. But the Presi- dent is moving in the- only logical direction over the long run. Americans, even if reluc- tantly, must accept the inevitability of higher-cost energy and a change in their liv- ing habits. It was not easy for Mr. Ford to veto still another Democratic bill, this one designed to keep the controls on domestically pro- duced "old" oil. The fact that the White House gave little publicity to the veto action suggests the political awkwardness of it. But, given the world's depleting oil resources, the President has no realistic alternative: He must pursue a long-range program that forces consumers to reduce the use of oil, encourages the expansion of domestic pro- duction, and gets the U.S. away from growing dependence on foreign supplies. The decontrol of "old" oil would not nee- essarily give an impetus to new exploration in the short run because the oil companies are going full steam now. But it would en- courage the use of secondary or tertiary re- covery methods on old wells, adding perhaps billions of barrels of oil to the domestic sup- ply. Moreover, it would also simplify the petroleum market, which now functions un- der an unwieldy two-price structure, and it would make alternative sources of energy, like solar heat, more attractive costwise. . The major concern of course is that a de- regulation of prices on "old" oil, which ac- counts for 60 percent of all domestic pro- duction, will trigger sharp increases in fuel costs, and add to inflationary dangers at the very moment the economy is beginning to Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800130031-9 E 4200 Ap p rovC0FM1WM2fW R1GIA- 97i 4p0144RQp ,0130031 ~4c19V turn around. Whether the impact would be anywhere near as great as Democrats charge is questioned by economists. But, in any event, the intent of the administration Is to phase out the controls gradually-and to place a tax on the windfall profits of oil companies that can be rebated to the con- sumer to offset the economic impact. There obviously will be a compromise be- tween the White House and the Democratic Congress. Without it, the controls on old oil will expire August 31 and this would produce an immediate andsudden jump in oil prices. Both sides want to avoid this. But amid the complex political maneuver- ing now going on one thing stands out: The nation does not yet have a solid, comprehen- sive energy program that is understood and supported by the American public. Recession has put the energy question on the back burner, the politicians in Congress don't want to make tough decisions, and an abun- dance of oil on the market defies all warn- ings of crisis. Somehow, there has to be better commu- nication between government and public on this crucial matter. According to the New York Times, Mr. Ford plans to send to Con- gress another program of oil price decontrol. Perhaps this would be a good occasion for him to go to the nation and explain the ABCsof the energy dilemma. Americans have never lacked an ability to adapt to new con- ditions-but they need convincing that the time for change is now. THE DEATH OF REV. ALPHOS A. SKONIECKI HON. SILVIO 0. CONTE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, July 28, 1975 Mr. CONTE. Mr. Speaker, it was with great sadness and deep regret that I learned of the death of the Reverend Alphos A. Skoniecki in Turners Falls, Mass. Father Skoniecki was a great friend, and both his friendship and spiritual leadership will be sorely missed. A native of Zielun, Poland, Father Skoniecki came to Canada at the out- break of World War I. where he grad- uated from the University of Montreal in 1915. During World War I he was ac- tive in recruiting Polish citizens in Amer- ica. for the Polish Army, and was later instrumental in raising funds for the rebuilding of Poland after the.war. From 1918-25, Father Skoniecki served as the pastor of the Sacred Heart Church in Easthampton, Mass., a posi- tion to which he brought great dedica- tion and understanding. He later served as pastor of Our Lady of Czestochowa Church in Turners Falls from 1925-48. During this time he was always known for his responsiveness to the needs of his parishoners and the open arms and heart with which he greeted those in need. Father Skoniecki celebrated his 50th year of ordination in 1967 while pastor of the Saints Peter and Paul Church in Palmer, Mass. In. addition to his inspirational work as a man of the cloth, Father Skoniecki was also a distinguished journalist. He was the founder and editor of Plast, the Polish language newspaper in Chicopee, Mass., from 1918-25. He was also the founder of the Chicopee Herald. During World War II, Father Skri- niecki was the executive secretary for the Coordinating Committee of Seven Eastern States working to point out the dangers of communism to Members of Congress. In recognition of his wartilae efforts, Father Skoniecki was made a lieutenant colonel in the Polish Army in 1954. For his journalistic and charital-le works for the liberation of Poland and the Polish cause, Father Skoniecki rf - ceived the Polish Army Cross of Merit, the Silver Sword of General Haller, and the Silver Cross of the Polish Rom..n Catholic Union of America. Father Skoniecki was a most talented man, a, dedicated clergyman, _a great patriot, and a distinguished journalist. He will be greatly missed, although in the hearts of those who had the great fortune of knowing him he will never 'oe forgotten. THE LIE-DETECTOR AND THE THREAT TO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS HON. EDWARD I. KOCH OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Monday, July 28, 1975 Mr. KOCH. Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw to the attention of my colleagues an excellent article which appeared in the Washington Star concerning the polygraph machine: the- problems it seeks to solve and the problems that it creates. The experiences of the auth^,r, Jim McClellan, vividly depict the pr~.cs- sures that the polygraph machine's use in employment can put on our fragile system of constitutional rights. His is the story of a person so intimidated by the polygraph that he felt compelled to confess to having purloined a handful of popcorn at his job. He was forced to take not one but three lie-detector tests, and when the third time he refused, he was fired. However well intentioned the poly- graph examiner may be, as I believe the one in this story is, the legitimate riglits of such people as Jim McClellan are jeopardized by the use of the lie detector. My bill, -H.R. 2596, would ban the use of polygraphs in employment. Business can use fairer and more effective means to combat employee theft. Certainly, we cannot allow the rights of employees to be undermined for the expediency of employers. I commend this article to my col- leagues because it does present both sides of the issue. It is our responsibility in the Congress to come to grips with this threat to constitutional rights. The article follows: [From the Washington Star, July 27, 19' 5J MY LIE DETECTOR NIGHTMARE (By Jim R. McClellan) (Norf.-Jim McClellan worked in a 7-Eleven store in Arlington from mid-1i'73 to mid-1974. His account of his reaction to company insistence that employes take po'y- graph tests follows. Glenn Meggard's firm administered the tests to McClellan and other 7-Eleven era- ployes. He disagreed with some of McClellan's impressions of events during the testing, and some of his remarks are reported here in italic type, as are some remarks of Frank Kitchen, Washington-Baltimore division manager for 7-Eleven.) The "lie detector" is about as democratic way to apply for a job, or to remove one's self from suspicion." So says Glenn Meggard, president of Atlantic Security Agency Inc. The `lie detector' is about as democratic as the rack. That is my conclusion after experiences with polygraph tests both in applying for a job and in later trying to remove myself from suspicion. I applied for a job as a clerk in a 7-Eleven store in 1973. After completing an applica- tion and passing a physical and an aptitude test, I was welcomed into what the parent Southland Corporation calls the "Southland Family." I quickly came to see how my new cor- porate parents treated their children. The first thing I was made to do was take a trip over to see Glenn Meggard and his staff of veteran security agents for a polygraph test. It was Meggard's assignment to question me and to verify the truthfulness of statements in my application.-In other words, 7-Eleven wanted to know whether my character was sterling enough for a $2-an-hour job. Atlantic Security has three bland rooms leading off its lobby which are equipped for polygraph interrogations. I was led into one and seated in an oversized, almost com- fortable chair. The theory of the polygraph is that when a person gives a false response to a question there will be noticeable signs of stress: changes in blood pressure, breathing, pulse, and skin resistance. Never trust a palm sweater, you know. The examiner told me It was Important that I trust him and his machine and he was going to ask me some questions to familiarize me with the test and the equipment, and to put me at ease. With the machine turned off, I was asked if I had stolen anything from a previous employer, if I smoked marijuana or used drugs, drank to excess, if I'd written bad checks; and questions generally probing whether I was truthful in filling out South- land's application. With some preliminaries over, a tube was attached to my chest. A cuff which looked like the kind physicians use to measure blood pressure was inflated around my wrist. Some electrodes were attached to the fingers of one of my hands. I half expected a messenger to come running with a pardon from the governor, but it didn't happen. The examiner told me to look at a spot on the wall about five feet in front of me, and warned that if my gaze strayed, or if I coughed, took a deep breath or fidgeted, the test results could be affected. Then the machine was turned on and I was asked all the questions again. Fortunately, the machine vouched for my integrity and I started work at 7-Eleven. MEGGARD. It is standard polygraph practice to thoroughly acquaint a subject with each of the questions, and with the whole proce- dure, before the examination begins. Then the element of surprise or confusion-which could distort the meaning of a subject's re- sponses-is eliminated, Meggard says. At the end of two months of faithful serv- ice to 7-Eleven I was given an opportunity to reaffirm my honesty. As a result of a $60 shortage, all the store's employes were re- quired to pay another visit to Atlantic Se- curity. I objected to taking another poly- graph. I resented being mistrusted and I was angry that I was being made to prove my innocence even though there was nothing to indicate I had done anything wrong. This seemed contrary to one of those con- stitutional rights I had always been told were unalienable. But to refuse the exam Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800130031-9