MR. KASTENMEIER. MR. SPEAKER, PRIVACY IS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT IN THE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80S01268A000200010024-5
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: February 22, 2006
• Sequence Number: 24
• Publication Date: March 28, 1977
• Content Type: OPEN

lll7$,J the, Coriimission wlI1 Continue to Commission has been extended a total of stitutional itignts auDcommiu to wnicu
h isdi ti _ ,. I of tie issues
r
ave
i
t
4.1 ~'~ . Iffa7ch 2 , 19`7'
~ CO G> ESS E b iri;
s
on, as jur c on ove
ens
providg coligressional testimony on civil six tunes. The most recent ex
rights matters and analysis of'proposed which keeps the Commission operating on which the Commission repori;s.
-legislation- review and refer # o civil through fiscal year 1978, was passed by Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I am prepared
rights" enforcement agencies individual the Congress in 1972 (Public Law 92- to study the Commission's agenda, for the
coif i'1 Ints of discrimination-approxi-` 496). Last year, the Commission sought upcoming year, and I look forward to
irately 2,000' complaints projected-i5ub- authorizations for both fiscal year 1977 the hearings on the legislation wiaich will
lisle t56- quarterly Civil Rights Digest, and fiscal year 1978, but the Judiciary be conducted by the Subcommittee on
`,?and ctsepinate the Digest and other Committee wisely authorized appropria- full and Constitutional Rights.
Comm sign publications. to Government tins for only 1 year. Thus, the Commis-1 Mr. KASTENMEIER. Mr.. Speaker,
' and' In- sion must come before Congress again- privacy is an essential element in the
p
)rtvate organizations
agencies
,
,
dividual Citizens, conduct public hear- this year seeking a 1-year authorization. American ideal of liberty, a 'basic right
lags on major civil rights issues, and They are requesting the sum of $10,540,- recognized by the fourth amendment to
publish f r"anscripts_ and reports of those 000, which represents a $1 million in- the Constitution. As Justice Brandeis
hearings-four multiday hearings pro- crease over last year's authorized level, wrote, each individual's right to privacy
jected,for fiscal year 1978; and support Since its creation in 1957, no one could is "the most comprehensive of ri;; hts, and
the work of ,its 51 State advisory com- say that the Commission has not been the right most valued by civilized -men."
inittees-which, are ex~ eeted to hold active and outspoken on Several 'impor- Within the last several years many
approximately 340 public ` meetings and tant social issues which have arisen over citizens have begun to fear that this
Issues 75 published reports based on their the last 20 years. Specifically, the Com- basic right is being steadily eroded by
Independent investigations of local civil mission was established to perform five the use of modern electronic technology
rights problems in fiscal year 1978. primary functions: First, to investigate to eavesdrop on conversations. Unfortu-
The legislative life of the Commission allegations that citizens are being de- nately, increasing numbers of Ameri-
has been extended five `times, the latest prived of their right to vote as a result cans have begun to fear that Govern-
action for 5 years until 1878. At that of their_race, religion, sex,' or national ment is more interested in intruding into
time, a limitation was placed on the origin; second, to collect and subse- their private lives than in actirs,r to pro-
agency's appropriation at $7,000,000. It quently study information concerning tect their privacy.
has been necessary, therefore, for Con- legal developments which could consti- Until passage of the Omnibus Crime
gress to raise periodically the a'uthoriza- tiite a denial of equal protection of laws Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968,
tiorl ceiling for the Commission. The bill under the Constitution; third, to appraise the only Federal statute on wiretapping
we propose w o u l a authorize funding for Federal laws and policies with respect was section 605 of the Federal Communi-
fiscalyear 1978 of _ 1 ,540,000, an in- to- the equal protection under the Con- cations Act of 1934, which prohibited in-
ver the fiscal year stitution; fourth, to serve as a national terception and divulgence of conversa-
cre~ase of $1,000,000 over'
1977 level, The, fiscal year 197$ moneys clearinghouse for information in respect tions transmitted by wire. The Depart-
have been approved by the Office of to denials of equal protection of the meet of Justice interpreted section 605
Managgement and Budget as consistent laws; and fifth, to submit reports, find- to mean that the law was violated only
with the President's program. _ ings, and recommendations. to the Presi- If an intercepted conversion wa: divulged
I urge my colleagues to join with Rep- dent and the Congress. (See 42 U.S.C. to outsiders, and the question was never
}es~ntatives RODINO, BUTLER,, NWICBEILEi{, NS MIION-, 1975c.) decided by the Supreme Court. It
~Uxi{~.,, was
BE A, NLITCHELL, SEIBERILMr, RINAN, Vand VOLT- functions, order to carry out their statutory not until the 1968 act that Congress en-
ETA, DRINANE
unctions, the Commission conducts fact- acted a comprehensive statute on wire-
1sE1 and support the Civil Rights Com- fending hearings. Although the Commis- tapping and electronic surveillance.
mission Authorization Act of 1977. sion has not been vested with enforce- That statute, title III of the Omnibus
Mr. BUTT tR. Mr. Speaker, today Z. am merit authority, it does have subpena Crime Control and Safe Streets Act, ac-
joining my colleague on the House ,iudl- power. Using this power, the Commission tually extended official eavesdropping by
ri Subcommittee on Civil and Cohsti- elicits facts from a wide range of public auttiorizingdrequent and prolonged elec-
tu for al Rights, the 'gentleman from officials, minority group representatives, tronic surveillance by Federal and State
California (Mr. EnwAxns) , iri introduc- and other citizens who represent diverse investigators in criminal cases. It also
tag the Civil Rights Commission l#elu- interests and points of view. Coupled with authorized, for the first time, the use
thorizatlon Act of 1977. During my'ten- its hearing powers, the Commission spon- of wiretap evidence in criminal trials.
ire a the ranking minority member on sort conferences on regional and national Most importantly, y, sat 1968 2511(3)e any
m$sthe subcommittee the Civil Rights Com- levels in order to aid its fact gathering
function. Finally,,the staff researches and attempt to deal with one of the most
si4n has appeared 'and presented
testimony on several issues which fall investigates issues. which relate to its senitive contemporary issues-the power
within the subcommittee's board juris- statutory functions. Using these tools, the of the Executive to engage in wiretap-
diction, I certainly have not' always Commission compiles and disseminates ping and electronic surveillance solely
agreed with the positions advocated or its product along with recommendations for the purpose of gathering foreign
the conclusions reached by.the Comimis- to the President and the Congress. These intelligence.
sion; however, t can attest to the gen- conclusions and recommendations are Presidents since Franklin Roosevelt
erally thorough work and valuable con- submitted for review and possible enact- have asserted that their responsibilities
tribution the Commission makes when merit by the executive and legislative as Commander in Chief under article II
it testifies on programs or reports on a branches of the Federal Government. of the Constitution give them the power
particular issue. As a result of the controversial nature to conduct electronic eavesdropping
I join with the gentleman from Call- surrounding many of the' issues which without regard to the restraiAts of the
forms, (Mr. EDWARDS) in sponsoring the arise within the Commission's far-reach- fourth amendment.
reauthorization, because I Believe that ing jurisdiction, some of the Commis- On May 21, 1940, President Roosevelt
tie Commission merits `bipartisansup sioh's studies and reports have been criti- issued a memorandum to the Attorney
port, however, I wish to announce-that sized by Members of Congress and the General asserting that electronic surveil-
I am reserving judgment, and cone- public. In the past, I have taken issue lance would be proper under the Con-
quently my vote on this legislation,` until with some of the conclusions reached stitution in cases of "grave matters in-
the Commission has testified before our and recommendations proposed in Com- volving the defense of the Nation." The
subcommittee on this bill. During the' mission reports. What we must all re- exact nature of "grave matters" involy-
subc lnmittee's hearing, 'I plan to ask member is that a report of the Commis- ing the defense of the Nation was never
IV- concerning the"tom sion Is lot the final authority on any fully explained. However, it is now known
ss et and their laps for studies given issue These reports merely repre- that national security was used as a res.
,
uu _
and reports during fist year 1078.- sent a factual, professional analysis, son or a pretext to eavesdrop on the com-
repared as a munications not only of foreign sp es
pe h
been
h
hi
h
hi
p
o
ave
c
we
s w
Commision on Civil lei
g
wa1 ' seated by .the Civil Rights Act of result of -diligent and nonpartisan re- but also of law-abiding American citi-
1957. Originally authorized as a tciiiipo- search. This is certainly the approach zens who had no connection with a for-
rary agency for a 2-year period, the I use as a member of the Civil and Con- eign power but whose views were con-
App `oved For Release. 2006/03/17 : CIA-RDP80S01268A000200010024-5
 Approved For Release2a06103117, CIA-RDP80S01268A000200010024-5
March Z$, 1977 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-, tr$E H-;627,
State and kredarage laws/model codes, I n , scf Year- 1978, the Commission ABILITY of SCHOOLS TO EDUCATE, MINORITY
and secondary literature _to provide sub- will also initiate ctver.nine?projects deal- STUDENTS
stantive mil delines, recommendations,, ing_ with numerolas, issues of significa , Tkstudy will examine the existing
,alyd criterr or drafting, nonbiased rape civil, rights impact. including enforce- research evidence to ascertain what im-
law,, and provide a critical catalog nient of Federal nondiscriminatiirp stat- pact differences among schools have on
of exlsting and proposed rape law revs- utes, discrimination in the military serv-_ minority students and to assess the po-
sions ahtl,. znoi el ,codes, y jurisdiction, ices, the impact of foreign government tential of schools for providing effective
subject area, and utility. policies on civil rights, and domestic education for all, students. It will criti-
FEDEkA`L CrCtL T S ENFalU M ENT EFFORT ._ violence, cally review the major research evidence
E LLq ''UP REPORT Speciacaily, the Commission will begin which has been interpreted as showing
The Commission wail complete and Fmk #n the following areas: that variations among schools do not
publish the final volume dealing with COERCED STERILIZATION have much differential impact on mi-
policymaking, of the "Federal Civil Coerced sterilization includes both nority students, and recommend the
nights .Enforcement Effort" 1974 study. overt coercion aucl acceptance of unin- types of research that will correct the
The study 'to date has documented the formed consent. This-study will ascertain past deficiencies in research strategies.
h
i
f
nie'iit has not appreciably improved since
the com rehenslve study series origi-
hated in 1970, _ The Commission will
therefore conduct reviews of all Federal
agencies cited in the study to determine
the extent to which they have adopted
and implemented the recommendations
contained therein. We will, also review
and evaluate any other remedial actions
taken by these agencies.
STATE ANTI LOCAL CIVIL _RIGHTS (HUMAN'
RE*r8) AGENCIES STUDY
Over 90 percent of the States and
more than 500 localities have civil rights
or human rights commissions or depart-
fnents.,'T'hey vary enormously from State
to State in terms of enabling legislation,
'ides of discrimination covered, ' classes
protected, extent of enforcement capa-
bility, constituencies,? administrative
structures, budgetary support, and qual-
ity of work product. This study will ex-
amine these, agencies and their relation-
ship with Federal civil rights agencies.
IMPACT OF FOREIGN GOVERNMENT POLICIES ON
CIVIL RIGHTS
Actions by foreign governments may
result in discrimination against U.S. citi-
zens and residents because of their race,
religion, sex, or national origin. This dis-
crimination may occur either by the di
rest application of the policies of foreign
governments to Americans, or through
indirect methods, Including the economic
and/or diplomatic coercion of the U.S.
and multinational private employers and
U.S. Government agencies in regard to
whom they hire, send overseas, or use as
contractors, for example, the recent Arab
economic boycott of American companies
doing business with Israel or employing
American Jews. The study will examine
the adequacy of Federal agency policies
to prevent such discrimination, and the
extent to which those policies have in
fact been enforced.
RACE AND GENDER ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOR
IN THE UNITED 'STATES
The focus of the project is on the indi-
vidual and, institutional determinants of
race, ethnic, and gender attitudes and
behavior. Employing several interlocking
approaches, this project will examine the
causes of occupational and job segrega-
tion and the development and conse-
quences of ethnic and gender identity.
e
This study will provide an enhanced serious shortcomings of title VI enforce-
understanding of the basic dynamics of ment, will review the current extent of
prejudice and discrimination, thereby discrimination in federally assisted pro-
eontributing to the development of new grams and recommend a Government-
approaches to the solution of civil rights wide strategy for combating this dis-
t
e
ncidence o
forced sterilization by
race, sex, age, and economic status of
those sterilized, and will investigate the
impact of Sterilization' on the health and
legal rights of the victims. The study will
also determine the extent of Federal in-
volvement, in forced sterilizations, as well
as Investigate the implementation of
State,eugenics laws, including a focus on
the differential impact of such imple-
mentation on low-income and/or minor-
ity women.
:RACIAL/ETHNIC/SEXUAL HETEROGENEITY AND
CONFLICT
This study will examine the cultural
aspects of intergroup relations-the role
played by power, identity, assimilation,
and other such factors among all groups,
Including ethnics and whites. The study
also will evaluate the extent to which
the design and implementation of pub-
lic and selected private programs and
policies generate or exacerbate conflict,
and will evaluate the manner In which
the common and separate Interests of
groups can be met without encouraging
Increased group competition for
resources.
EVALUATION OF FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT
of TITLE Ix
This study will focus on both employ-
ment and programmatic provisions of
title IX and will address Federal enforce-
ment of the law as well as the nature
and extent of voluntary compliance by
school districts and institutions of higher
education.
DISCRIMINATION IN THE MILITARY SERVICE
This study. will probe the extent of
racial, national origin, religious, and sex
discrimination in the military service.
We will examine representation of mi-
nority groups and women in each branch
of the service, paying particular atten-
tion to rankings, promotion, recruitment,
assignment, training opportunities, and
the service academies. We will look at the
degree to which the military effectively
implements its equal opportunity en-
forcement responsibilities in housing,
both in the U.S.A. and overseas, and the
nature and adequacy of civil rights com-
plaint and appeals procedures within the
military.
This study, a sequel to an earlier Com-
mission report which documented th
The Commission will plan, organize
and manage a consultation bringing to-
gether a variety of urban specialists to
discuss such problems as unemployment
and underemployment, poor and inade-
quate housing, deficient schools, soaring
crime rates, substandard social services,
ineffectual public transportation, and
lack of leadership.
CONSULTATION ON ALTERNATIVES TO TRADI
TIONAL CIVIL RIGHTS PROGRAMS
During the past 20 years, civil rights
efforts have been based on the assump-
tion that equality of opportunity and,
more recently, equality of results are
best achieved by ever-greater govern-
mental intervention in the social proc-
esses of the country. This approach has
recently been attacked by some tradi-
tional supporters of civil rights and equal
opportunity who now question the effi-
cacy of massive and complex Govern-
ment porgrams and their accompanying
regulations and bureauracy. The purpose
of this consultation will ' be to provide a
forum for the exchange and exploration
of rational and scholarly viewpoints of
this increasingly critical issue.
CONSULTATION ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Although only limited data are avail-
able regarding the extent of violence
within a family or quasi-family context,
it is apparent that the victims of such
violence are overwhelmingly female and
the perpetrators are male. It has been
alleged that police inaction and discrimi-
natory treatment of female victims of
such violence prevents most such cases
from ever reaching the courtroom.
The Commission will hold a consulta-
tion to bring together people who are ac-
tively involved In combating domestic/
marital violence on several fronts. This
would include researchers, attorneys, and
initiators of innovative. programs to as-
sist battered women. The participants
will look at the effectiveness of already
proposed and/or implemented remedies,
including the specially trained police
units established to deal with domestic
violence calls, the halfway houses estab-
lished by women's groups in several cities
as shelters/refuges for abused women,
and the attempts to provide legal as-
sistance to battered women seeking di-
vorce and support orders.
This list of Commission projects does
not, by any means, reflect the full extent
of agency activity projected for fiscal
year 1978. In addition to these projects,
the Commission will carry out its normal
program of civil rights monitoring and
information dissemination. In fiscal year
Approved For Release 2006/03/17 : CIA-RDP80SO1268A000200010024-5
 Approved For Release 2006/03/17 CIA-RDP80SO1268AO00200010024-5
Approved :For Releaee 200.6/03/17: CIA-RDP80SO1268A000200010024-5k.
national security wiretapping. n
~9e' to his invitation for congres- or is about to be committed. This brings For the anon a, wo
won
time, and the actual textd analysis of the bill
.
for p hegfirand elec an ex
siRna ,.input Congressman RAILSBACK nationahive pi wireta
st? ee~,,ed subversive by the Director of "the ing our cooperation aria inOAUUC.4 u.a~? ??-~---- -
Fec eral bureau bf Investigation or by language we had developed as a sub- quired for a search pursuant to the
sore eral agents continually wiretapped' It had sponsored on national security. required for w etaps in crimL criminal nest-
American, citizens where domestic and Although the President acknowledged gations.
foreign security concerns were Involved our letter, neither he nor the Attorney In order that electronic surveillance
writes into
the Attorney ntelligenee purposes, the bill for
until mous Ieith tdecsion,edecl Court, i in drGeneral aft language. responded substantively
warrantless wiretaps were forbidden by General did not consult with us-al- the law four provisions not currently normal
inal
cases. the fourth amendment where there was though pto preparation of it final draft bill avFirst, it expands the crimist of crimes the
f o' connection with the activities of a a
foreign power. The Court failed to con- which was introduced by Chairman investigation of which may serve as a
sider, however, the question of whether RODINO as H.R. 12750, the Foreign In- basis for an electronic surveillance. The
such warrafstTess eavesdropping was per- telligence Surveillance Act of 1976. new crimes are, violations of the Export
m1 tec#' ere'the subject was directly An identical bill, S. 3197, was intro- Administration Act and the Foreign
invo1vewith" a foreign power, although duced in the Senate. While H.R. 12750 Agents Registration Act, crimes likely to
several lower courts have so held. and S. 3197 represented a distinct de- involve foreign intelligence situations. Of
Warrantless electronic surveillance parture from the former Administra- course, wiretaps already may be sought
conducted by agents of the Federal Gov- tion's long held opposition to any statu- in cases of violations of espionage, sabo-
ernment under the guise of national se- tory controls on foreign intelligence tage and treason statutes.
curity is particularly insidious, even wiretapping, they were considerably Second, the bill permits the permanent
when involving contacts between an more limited in scope than bills which waiver of notice of the surveillance to a
American and representatives of a for- earlier had been considered by our sub subject who is overheard as long as the
eign power, because it often is conducted committee. A broad coalition of civil evidence obtained is used only for intelli-
with regard to the subject's political ac- liberties groups, in fact, argued that the gence purposes and not for criminal
tivities. This asserted exception- to the bill simply constituted a disguised prosecutive purposes.
protections of the Bill of Rights, with method of legitimizing the questionable Third, it permits the Court to author-
all the variations made possible through practices which had in the past been ize a surveillance for up to 90 days where
the use of modern electronic technology, represented by warrantless wiretapping. the subject of the investigation is an
coup form the cornerstone of a future These groups, led by the American Civil agent of a foreign power. In purely crim-
police state. Liberties Union, pointed out that the bill inal investigations under current law,
The dangers inherent in authorizing did not require a showing of criminal authorization of an electronic surveil-
the President broad powers in the name probable cause, did not permit judicial lance may not exceed 30 days.
of "national defense" or "national secu- evaluation of the facts supporting a wire- Fourth, the bill permits the govern-
rity" were clearly recognized by the late tap application, and failed to eliminate ment to maintain strict security by con-
Chief Justice, Earl Warren, when he all exceptions to the warrant require- fining wiretap applications
the v tricti of U.S.
stated, in striking down a part of the ment. Court of Apa Appeas when foreign rict igeCo-
Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950, Although I shared many of the reser- lumbia Circuit
is sought.
that orations of the organized civil liberties information that my bill will permit wire-
This conce't of "national defense" cannot community, I agreed to cosponsor H.R. I tapping believe that m electronic ermitlwire-
in-
be dgemed an end in itself, justifying an 12750 after personal requests by the where necessary- for obtain frveill ce
exercise of * * *' power designed to pro- President and Attorney General to do so. where r for ob, ini, at the same
mote such a goal. Implicit in the term "na-
do defen se While our subcommittee held 3 days of ttellig ime, respond to the objections raised by
those " is d ea notion set N a- hearings on H.R. 12750 in the 94th Con-
ti ore part and Ideals would which edt this n c. we failed to move to markup on the civil liberties community to the ad-
if, in apart * ?. It would defend be ironic, gress, ministration's 1976 bill. That bill per-
sanction tion name the of subversion of of ffens one e, of we would s those e the Senate, with measure for which the the reason that the Administration mitted electronic eavesdropping simply
a orney Gen-
the * '4'* which make the defense of had collaborated originally in develop- upon tthhee the finding ingj by by the the Attorney
the&tion worthwhile. So said the Chief ing the legislation, failed to act. weral ect of surveillance
as an agent of a foreign, power. It did
Justice my United States v. Robel, 389 U.S. With the convening of the 95th Con- not require the traditional fourth
$58, 264 (1967). gress, those of us who in the past have not require showing a probable cause
v-
that evidence of e
The - Judiciary Subcommittee on been involved with the issue, have had amendment
Courts, Civil Liberties and the Adminis- an opportunity to reexamine the whole to believe would that evidence Of criminal c the acti
In addit, 1976
tration of Justice, Which I chair, began question of national security wiretapping bill did not fopermit und. the judge, to whom
application fora judge, is made,
studying the issue of national security with a fresh perspective, unimpeded by bill
wiretapping 3 yearq `ago, in April 1974, the limitations imposed on the debate by th demand evidence supporting the facts
when we held hearings on several bills, the previous administration. to demand the application. My bill would
including a proposal to require a court As a result of this reexamination I certified the he ap fion. to tow uld
order prior to any Interception of oral or have developed a new bill, which I be- permit judge full power st the
wire communications in national secu- lieve will meet the legitimate intelli- assertions th th , supporting the appl cte anY con-
At cases. gence needs of the Nation and, at the Finally, my bill of an in con-
At that time Assistant Attorney Gen- same time, bring national security sur- paresidential power to conduct sherent
oral. Henry Petersen, speaking for the ad- veillance within the protective bounds- lance outside the procedures established
ministration,, stated to the subcommittee, ries of the statutory law. by law.
"let me be very brief. We oppose these My bill, which I am introducing today, Intelligence
bills. That is it." During the subsequent is entitled the Foreign Intelligence Sur- I believe Surveillance that at the the Foreign of Intell ence
ty to bring the
2-year period, Mr. Petersen and his sue- veillance Amendments of 1977. an excellent Amendments
cessoxs, as 'OVell as intervening Attor- It repeals that provision of current Sancades, long pebate over national see
neys General, consistently opposed the law, tile 18, United States Code, section decades, wiretapping to a close with a se-
cOfcept of legislation imposing judicial 2511(3), which disclaims legislative in- curl y'wi tapping which will meet t-survei
lance
sponsible *Oeop pngts on national security wire- thetpresilimit denttn nat onlal securtyecases- intelligence needs of the Executive with-
t last year, President Ford an- and permits electronic surveillance only in am the limendment.itations imposed by the fourth
cangefn plicy. He ind icated when a Federal judge finds that there is
ness ork with Congress to probable cause to believe that the sur- Mr. Speaker, I invite the support of duce evid
that
the r em ofrcotirt supervision
T.-. of one oance f a 1st of specific crimesehas been my olleagu s fortis meaYst re coal, and
T Id like to submit
nrr.h. 2R_ 1977 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE
 Approved For Release. 2006/03/17 : CIA-RDP80S01268A00020001.0024
2630 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE March 28, 1977
T
HE FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE
_4MENDMENTS OF 1977
E3j:PLANATION AND ANALYSIS
Explanation
The bill is styled as the Foreign Intel-
ligence Surveillance Amendments of 1977
rather than as the Foreign Intelligence Sur-
veillance Act, as was the 1976 Administra-
tion bill.
The language difference Illustrates a fun-
damental policy difference between the two
proposals. The Foreign Intelligence Surveil-
lance Act of 1978 would have created a spe-
cial national security electronic surveillance
statute for which the threshold of imple-
mentation would be probable cause that the
subject of the surveillance Is a "foreign
agent." In addition, the factual assertions
supporting the application would not be
subject to examination by the judge, The
proposed Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Amendments of 1977 do not create a new
statute. They merely-- amend the existing
electronic surveillance statute, Chapter. 119
of Title 18, United States Code, to permit
surveillance for intelligence purposes where
the traditional criminal probable cause show-
ing has been made. Specifically, the Amend-
ments would: (1) remove the existing Con-
gressional disclaimer with respect to na-
tional security surveillance contained in 18,
United States Code, Section 2511(3); (2)
permit surveillances for a period of 90 rather
than 30 days; (3) permit waiver of notice
to the subject of the surveillance, and (4)
permit the government to present applica-
tions for national security electronic sur-
veillance to a small group of judges so that
security easily could be maintained and spe-
cialized judicial knowledge of national se-
curity matters could be developed.
Section-by-section analysis
Section 2.-This section amends the defi-
nition provisions of Chapter 119, United
States Code, to provide a definition of "for-
eign intelligence Information." It is almost
identical to the definitions proposed for the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1976
as reported by the Senate Judiciary and In-
telligence committees.
Section 3.-This section deletes the dis-
claimer in 18, United States Code, Section
2511(3), in which Congress recognizes a
Presidential surveillance power beyond that
authorized in the statutory law.
Section 4. This section amends 18 United
States Code, Section 2516 to permit appli-
cations for electronic surveillance orders In-
volving foreign intelligence information to
be made to the Court of Appeals for the Dis-
trict-of Columbia Circuit. Its purpose is to
permit such applications to be made to a
small number of judges so that security can
be maintained and so that the judges to
whom such applications will be made may
develop sufficient experitise in national se-
curity matters.
Section 5. This section amends Title 18
United States Code, Section 2516 (1) (a) to
add to the list of offenses for which elec-
tronic surveillance may be used, two addi-
tional misdemeanor offenses which are par-
efforts over the last several ears to-pro-
Administration eign Agents ActRegistratlon Act and the Export toot and enlarge Redwood National
.
Section 6. This section amends 18 United Park; I note that his subcommittee began
States Code, Section 2517(3) to make it in- hearings on H.R. 3813 last week,
operative in cases where foreign intelligence The report recommends that the in-
surveillance information is sought. Section terior Department and the National
2517(3) provides that evidence received from Park Service should be given the au-
an electronic surveillance under Chapter 119 thority to enforce restrictions on timber
may be disclosed in judicial proceedings. cutting in the Redwood Creek basin
Section 7. This section amends Title 18
United States Code, Section 2518(5) to per- which are considered necessary to pro-
mit electronic surveillance for a period ex} tect park resources. The committee also
ceeding 30 days where foreign intelligence finds that the Interior Department and
information is sought. the Justice Department should require
This
Section United States Code. Sectioamends m Title 18 the three timber companies tocarry out
bSCtlon 9. This section creates a new Sea- In addition, the report
tion 2621 i
Ch
t
n
ap
er 119, united States Code, and I want to stress this
which permits application to the United Congress and the admin
States Court of Anneals for th
Dist
_-
e
rict
GE
Mr. Speaker, I ask
it that all Members
PROTFCTNG
REDWOO
PARK
quest of the gentleman from
'T'here was no objection.
emphasize
situation-t
Congress a
to the re-
Jlichigan?
moratoriu
Creek bas
man from California (Ml'. RYAN)
ognized for 5 minutes.
cient
designed
men UD
House
House Government Operations Com
JACKSO
Energ
tee
comp
1968, it has been a known fact that log -
Bing upslope and upstream from the park
and the famous "worm"-which is where
the tallest known trees in the world are
located-is damaging park resources. A
series of Interior Department studies and
Independent reviews document the fact
that elearcutting and associated logging
operations have caused extensive damage
to the timber, water, and soil resources
in the park.
The report, which was approved by
bipartisan 6 to 1 vote of the Environment
Energy and Natural Resources Subcom
p
land for Red
wo
admit it will b
e
out that
money s
the park be enlarged by a minimuliaaof
would come from
21500
, acres up to the 74,000 acres
posed in legislation (H.R. 3813)
duced by Representative PHIL B
tro-
under the Land nd
Act. Congress has a
Presidents Ford and
quested significant tncre
ations for the land and
don fund.
D continue at least until
lecade. Any money spent f
will come from this account, and will be
budgeted for over a several-year period.
The giant coastal redwoods are a na-
tional treasure created by nature over
thousands of years. Unlike other out-
standing examples of America's natural
heritage, such as the Grand Canyon,
Yellowstone, and Mt. Rushmore, the
great virgin coastal redwood forests are
an endangered resource rapidly on their
way to becoming extinct. Action Is
Full-scale ldg
Creek basin for
ulting from in-
park. I also want
ng in the Redwood
is season is slated to
begin in il. is Friday the Arcata
Redwood CO.s voluntary deferral of
cutting expire on two tracts of land
they own nea the Tall Trees Grove. In
light of this act-and I cannot over-
e urgency of the present
e report recommends that
d the administration seek a
on logging in the Redwood
' for a period of time suffi-
ongress to act on legislation
o protect the park. Congress-
and PHILIP BURTON of the
terior Committee and Senators
and ABOUREZK of the Senate
and Natural Resources Commit-
ve recently requested the timber
nies to impose such a moratorium.
t month I wrote President. Carter
aski g his assistance in seeking a mora-
m on logging by the timber com-
pa ies for a reasonable period of time in
r er to give Congress an opportunity to
- The President is supposed to have an
a ouncement on this subject at the end
o his week. If the Congress and the
dm' istration are not successful in
topp g timber cutting in the Redwood
reek asin in the next several weeks on
a volun ry basis, I believe we should be
prepay to take whatever steps are nec-
essary to nforce such a logging mora-
torium. T se trees and this park are
too valuable or us to do otherwise.
One final int: For those concerned
with the ex
ee a of acquiring additional
National Park-and I
pensive-let me point
ent for that purpose
funds appropriated
ater Conservation
h.orized and both
Carter have re-
s in appropri-
ater conserva-
expected
t end of this
Ar land ac-
Approved For Release 2006/03/17 CIA-RDP80SO1268A000200010024-5