If President Clinton's privacy advisor could not stop the proposal of a new law which might give the Feds more power to break and enter into home and computer files, then by God we need a plain old privacy czar, say some privacy advocates.
The Cyberspace Electronic Security Act would let authorities enter homes of suspected criminals and install devices allowing the authorities to bypass privacy protection on their home computers, so long as the authorities in question have appropriate search warrants.
Some analysts say the proposal will die quickly in Washington, but some worry Peter Swire, President Clinton's advisor on privacy issues, was not able to do more to stop the proposal from getting as far as it has already.
"We already have the FBI to argue the law enforcement point," says David Sobel, attorney for the Electronic Privacy Information Center. I don't understand why he is not acknowledging the problems so early on."
But Wired points out Swire has no authority to criticise policy; he can only make suggestions in internal debate. Swire has also dismissed outright the idea of a privacy czar.
He told the Washington Post last week the Clinton Administration hopes to "strike the right balance" between privacy concerns and law enforcement. But critics of the new proposal say it's not a proper balance when talking about breaking into people's homes.
A memo to one of Swire's agency's own people is said to summarize viewpoints on the proposal from various government agencies. Critics say it indicates Swire did a weak job at best of moving toward better privacy protection.
Whether any new privacy agency or office can be created is, among other things, a matter of funding which is not likely to materialise. And the Federal Trade Commission, Wired points out, has neither the authority nor the mandate to lock horns with the FBI.
Jim Dempsey, a staff attorney at the Center for Democracy in Technology, put it bluntly to the magazine. ""It comes down to a question not of personalities and offices, but a question of values," he says. "And privacy is a value in the Clinton administration that is always second to law enforcement."
