[Page: E529]

• Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, the National Sheriffs' Association, the Association of Chiefs of Police, the District Attorneys' Association, and The National Association of Attorneys General all oppose H.R. 695 (The SAFE ACT). The members of these organizations are planning to visit with Members of Congress this Spring to urge opposition to the SAFE ACT.

• The Justice Department found that the bill would `severely compromise law enforcement's ability to protect the American people from the threats posed by terrorists, organized crime, child pornographers . . . and other criminals,' the President will veto the bill if it is presented to him in its current form.

• The so called SAFE ACT (H.R. 695) presents an extremely one-sided response to the encryption issue. The bill was drafted by and for the software industry, at the expense of the national security and public safety needs of the American people.

• In an editorial, The Washington Post declared that `the real question is whether you believe this stuff poses a significant national security threat in the wrong hands. If you do--and we think it irresponsible to assume otherwise--then it's not enough to declare uncrackable privacy a civil right. You have to at least address the question of how to minimize intrusion into that right while preserving some ability to grapple with the potential danger.'

• The SAFE ACT (H.R. 695) is an unacceptable, unbalanced solution to the critical issue of encryption. it is imperative that the provisions included by the National Security Committee and the Intelligence Committee be incorporated into the Goodlatte bill in order to effect a compromise between the needs of industry and the legitimate law enforcement and international security needs of the American people. I respectfully request that you support a balanced encryption policy and oppose H.R. 695.

END