First, the "Lee Holland" which the Armed Forces Services Committee (AFSC)
referred me to yesterday is the same L.H. from MVPA. I was given Lee's home
phone by Kay at the MVPA (see next paragraph) and she confirmed the phone #
given me by Armed Forces Services is Lee's work number. Lee is on the road
until the weekend.
I talked to "Kay" at the MVPA this morning (since I joined yesterday) and
got the most detailed info. to date on this fiasco. Kay says Lee has been
on the phone constantly (probably not literally) for a couple of months on
this issue and talkes to everyone he can about it.
Kay said she thought AFSC referred me to Lee was because he has been in
touch w/many people there about this matter and would have authortative
information for me. Of course this is still B.S. for the Government to
refer me to a civilian to explain why the Government is doing something.
OK, I digress...
I told/asked Kay about wanting to know the reasoning behind the
introduction of the demil portion of HR-4205. Kay said her understanding
was that it stemmed from some incident where some computers were sold to
the public w/hard drives still in them which contained at least "sensitive"
material and the demil portion of HR-4205 was to address that problem. If
this is true, and that's probably as good an explanation as any, isn't this
a little overkill?
My background includes practicing law for a short time (until I learned
about the system and turned honest..... and that's no joke) and I have read
the offending portion of the bill several times. This is so poorly written
and legally flawed it's pathetic. Period! If this should pass, it would be
a legal can of worms.
If what Kay says was the motivation of the demil portion of HR-4205 then I
agree. Track down and demil items which are in civilian hands which could
pose a threat to national security. I think we all are in favor of national
security. But, write the bill in such a way as to let John Q. know what's
covered and of course the reason.
OK, that's the update from me. Now another thought about how to get some
real authoratative information right from the whore's mouth.
I'm in California. Years ago (around 1971) I was concerned about something
legal and so I flew to Washington, D.C. to talk to Justice William O.
Douglas (no appointment, just jumped on a plane). Well, he wasn't there
and the trip was wasted. My point?
There must be someone on this list who is close to D.C. How about calling
the office of Spence, set up an appointment to see him. Now the person may
have to fidge a little on the reason in order to get the appointment and/or
say they are from his district because I don't think he would see anyone if
he knows it's about the demil issue. If this can be done, or even an
appointment w/someone close to him, ask directly the reason behind the
demil portion of the bill. And also maybe have a letter containing the same
question to give to him or whoever is seen.
I for one would be happy to put up $10 to defray costs of the person going
to D.C. and I think everyone on this list (in the U.S.) who has a MV would
probably do the same. I know, probably an impossible task to organize but
it's a thought.
I really feel strongly representatives should be accountable to all the
people of the country, not just those in their district or state. With all
the questions Spence must have been getting on the demil issue, I can't
understand why he hasn't issued some statement. How long does it take to
write a Press Release or some other document stating why he introduced the
demil portion of the bill?
Anyway, enough free association for now but I promise.... more later.
My 2mm worth.
David
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 02 2000 - 09:32:33 PDT