Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
27581257
label
Privacy - Domestic Council Committee (4)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
27581257
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Privacy - Domestic Council Committee (4)
citationUrl
collections
Philip W. Buchen Files
Philip Buchen's General Subject Files
subjects
Privacy, Right of
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
27581257
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-08-01
month
8
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1974-08-01
month
8
year
1974
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
80642a21b9bae7b2
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 56, folder "Privacy - Domestic Council
Committee (4)" of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box 56 of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
Privary hundred and
12/16/75
December 2, 1974
Dear Bill:
Thank you very much for the information
that you and Larry will both be attending
on Monday, December 16, the luncheon of
the Privacy Committee Seminar.
Your attendance will be most welcome by
the participants.
Sincerely,
Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
The Honorable William B. Saxbe
The Attorney General
Washington, D. C. 20530
PWBuchen:ed
bee: Doug Metz
FORD is LIBRARY 076839
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Has Doug been advised
of this?
Aftor informinghim,
return tome for
regly.
P
R. FORD
LIBRARY GERALD
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
WASHINGTON
November 27, 1974
Dear Mr. Buchen:
I am pleased to accept your invita-
tion to attend the opening luncheon of
the Seminar on Privacy jointly sponsored
by the President's Comestic Council Com-
mittee on the Right of Privacy and the
Council of State Governments.
I would also like to bring with me
Deputy Attorney General Laurence H.
Silberman.
Sincerely,
Wm B Safhe
William B. Saxbe
Attorney General
Honorable Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, D. C. 20500
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
DOMESTIC COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHT OF PRIVACY
Privary
WASHINGTON D.C 20504
December 11, 1974
The Honorable Nelson A. Rockefeller
Vice President - Designate
Room 5600
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, New York 10020
Dear Governor:
Congratulations on your Senate confirmation! I trust that you
will let this office know as soon as you are ready to be briefed
on the Privacy Committee's program and plans. The Committee
staff is looking forward to your assumption of the Chairmanship
and will be glad to do whatever it can to prepare the way.
The Committee jointly with the Council of State Governments is
sponsoring a Privacy Seminar in Washington December 15-17.
We had hoped that you would have been confirmed and available
to participate in the program, but press reports, unfortunately,
are to the contrary.
Sincerely,
Douglas W. Metz
Acting Executive Director
DWM/fme
FORD is gree LIBRARI
bcc: Philip W. Buchen
Privacy
December 13, 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JACK MARSH
FROM:
PHIL BUCHEN
SUBJECT:
Liaison with Governor Rockefeller
Among matters on which the Governor and his staff may want
to be briefed soon after confirmation, one involves the Domestic
Council Committee on the Right of Privacy.
I know that the Committee staff, headed by Acting Director
Douglas W. Mets, is eager to have a meeting of the Cabinet-
level Committee occur fairly soon, with the new Vice
President as Chairman, and to have the Chairman and the
Committee consider the results of the work in which the
staff has been busily engaged.
LIBRARY GERALD F. FORD
Primacy
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 21, 1975
Dear Alan:
You were thoughtful and generous in
your comments to me, and I thank you
very much.
I indeed welcomed seeing you again at
the luncheon when you so ably dealt
with the subject of great interest to
me and the entire audience.
Very best wishes to you, as always.
Sincerely yours,
Thil
Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
Professor Alan F. Westin
Department of Political Science
Columbia University
New York, New York 10027
FORD LIBRARY G7V8
Columbia University in the City of New York
New York, N.Y. 10027
DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE
420 West 118th Street
December 31, 1974
Mr. Philip Buchan
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20005
Dear Phil:
It was a pleasure sitting next to you at lunch two weeks
ago and exchanging ideas about the privacy issues.
Now that Congress has passed a Privacy Protection Act, I
wanted to let you know how much those of us who have worked in
this area over the years appreciate the key role that was played
by the Domestic Council Committee on the Right of Privacy during
your leadership there. The fact that there is sensible new
legislation from Congress, and that many other initiatives are
also under way, is a tribute to the effective way you, and
Doug Metz now, have moved the Executive Branch into a constructive
rather than oppositional role in this area.
I hope that you will continue your nutureship of the privacy
cause from your present vantage point in the White House. Thoughtful
privacy policies need all the friends they can get.
With best personal regards for a happy and prosperous new
year,
Sincerely,
Ala
Alan F. Westin
Professor of Public Law
and Government
FORD
AFW: lc
Privary
January 22, 1975
Dear Mr. van der Zwaag:
Thank you very much for your kind invitation to address the
joint meeting in Grand Rapids of the A.S.M. and D. P.M.A.
on April 21, 1975, or at some other suitable date.
Unfortunately, I do not think my work here will permit me
to return to Grand Rapide, and therefore I must decline
your invitation.
However, I am sending your letter to Douglas Mets, Acting
Director of the Domestic Council Committee on the Right of
Privacy with a request that he provide you with suggestions
for a speaker. He knows of persons in your area who are
well informed on the matter of handling confidential data
within computer systems.
Sincerely yours,
Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
P.S. Give my best regards to all my
friends at Bradford Paper Co.
Mr. Donald van der Zwaag
W. J. Bradford Paper Company
P. O, Box 1014-B
Holland, Michigan 49423
CC: Douglas Meta
PWBuchen:ed
LIBRATA GERALD ? FDRD
Privacy
Crute
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 12, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JAMES T. LYNN
FROM:
PHILIP BUCHEN
P.W.B.
SUBJECT:
Douglas W. Metz
As you move to filling vacancies on your staff, I recommend
that you give careful consideration to Douglas W. Metz, who
is described in the attached document.
I brought Doug into the Government from the Washington office
of Booz, Allen & Hamilton, Inc. to be my deputy for the staff
of the Domestic Council Committee on the Right of Privacy and
I worked closely with him from April-August, 1974. Especially
because OMB now has responsibility under the Privacy Act, his
experience should be very valuable in this area. He is
generally a very capable administrator and because of his
legal education, has a lawyer's approach to problem solving.
I am thinking particularly that you might want to consider
him to fill Bob Marik's old position. If you have any
questions about Doug, I would be glad to answer them or try
to find out the information.
Attachment
BERALD B. FORD
DOUGLAS W. METZ
Mr. Douglas W. Metz is currently serving as Acting Executive
Director of the Cabinet-level Domestic Council Committee on the
Right of Privacy on leave of absence as a vice president of Booz,
Allen & Hamilton, Inc. He succeeded Mr. Philip W. Buchen upon
Mr. Buchen's appointment as Legal Counsel to the President. With
Booz, Allen, Mr. Metz was responsible for directing management
consulting assignments for public agencies and private institutions
in the United States and overseas.
Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Metz served as a Congressional
administrative and legislative assistant. His military service
includes duty as a Judge Advocate with the United States Air Force.
Mr. Metz received an A. B. degree in Political Science from
Colgate University, graduating magna cum laude. He received a
J.D. degree from the Law School of Wayne State University and
served as an editor of its Law Review.
Mr. Metz is admitted to law practice in Michigan, the District
of Columbia, the U. S. Court of Military Appeals, and the U. S.
Supreme Court. Professional memberships include the American
Bar Association, American Judicature Society, the American Society
for Public Administration, the Judge Advocates Association, of which
he has served as a director, and Phi Beta Kappa.
FORD & GERALD LIBRARY
Tuesday 4/15/75
Meeting
4/16/75
10 a.m.
12:25 The following people will attend the Privacy Group
meeting on Wednesday 4/16 at 10 a.m.:
Dick Parsons
Doug Metz
Lynn May
Peter Wallison
Bill Nichols
Walter Haase
Calvin Collier
Aor
FORDO is 03VUED LIBRARY
DOMESTIC COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHT OF PRIVACY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20504
AGENDA
STEERING GROUP MEETING
April 16, 1975 10:00 a.m. Mr. Buchen's Office
I.
Taxpayer Privacy Legislation
Tab A
II.
Consumer Privacy Rights Proclamation
Tab B
III.
Military Surveillance Legislation
Tab C
IV.
Proposal for Presidential Privacy Message
Tab D
FORD is GREAT LIBRAN
TAB A
and
FORD
is
07V833
Tab A
TAXPAYER PRIVACY LEGISLATION
President Nixon, at Vice President Ford's urging, repealed E.O. 11709
allowing Agriculture access to raw tax returns of farmers. Treasury, consistent
with a Privacy Committee initiative, sent Congress a bill on September 11, 1974,
to strengthen confidentiality protections for tax returns and tax return information.
A rival bill was advanced by Weicker and Litton. President Ford, on
September 20, 1974, circumscribed White House access to tax information by
E. O. 11805. The President met with Weicker and Litton at their request and
consented to codification of E.O. 11805, requested hearings on the question of
access for purposes other than tax administration, and directed Commerce
(Census and Bureau of Economic Affairs) and Justice (for nontax investigations)
to prepare and transmit "white papers" justifying their need for access to
IRS records.
Enactment, subsequently, of the Privacy Act poses the question of need
now for special legislation safeguarding tax returns and tax return information.
Treasury favors legislation, arguing: (1) that as a matter of public policy,
Congress alone should set the conditions of disclosure (to third parties) of
IRS records including the specific disclosures that IRS by rule-making would
establish as "routine uses" under the Privacy Act; (2) that certain amendments
to the IRS code are needed (e. g., extending confidentiality protections to
partnerships and trusts, and extending criminal penalties to IRS contractors)
to strengthen tax administration; and (3) that the effective date of the Privacy Act
should be extended because of anticipated administrative difficulties in com-
plying with the accounting for disclosure provisions of the Privacy Act.
Privacy Committee and OMB staff generally have resisted legislative
proposals which would operate to weaken the Privacy Act. Some provisions of
the Treasury bill would have such an effect. It is possible that many of
Treasury's concerns about the Privacy Act could be dealt with administratively
by OMB interpretation and guidance.
The Senate Finance Committee has scheduled hearings on the Weicker-
Litton bill for April 21 and 28. Treasury, Commerce and Justice await
guidance regarding their testimony.
The Weicker-Litton bill has three main objectives:
(1)
To restrict White House access--This objective has been
accomplished by E.O. 11805 which the President would
permit to be codified. The Weicker-Litton provision is
close to that of the Executive order.
FORD
- 2 -
(2)
To restrict Congressional access--Both the Weicker-Litton
and Treasury bills circumscribe Congressional access, however,
Weicker-Litton is more restrictive. The Privacy Act exempts
Congress from its provisions.
(3)
To limit access by other agencies to tax administration purposes
only--Weicker-Litton would deny Commerce (Census and BEA)
and Justice (for nontax cases) access to tax returns. The Privacy
Act would allow these and other agencies specified in the
Treasury bill access through its "routine use" and "law enforce-
ment" exceptions.
Both bills, it should be noted, would weaken the Privacy Act by restricting
taxpayer access largely to a copy of his own tax return.
Alternative Strategies
Option 1--Oppose legislation on the grounds that the Privacy Act plus
Executive Order 11805 provide adequate remedies.
Pros
The Congress and the President have taken significant steps
to protect tax returns. Should Congress wish to impose
restrictions greater than the Privacy Act on its own access
(as the President did), it may act by Congressional resolution;
Interagency transfers and uses permitted under the Privacy
Act but which Weicker-Litton would deny are vital to the
accomplishment of the missions of agencies such as Com-
merce and Justice. Such access is consistent with the
recently expressed intent of Congress in passage of the
Privacy Act;
Support of legislation might open "Pandora's box" for
unforeseen extraneous and ill-considered amendments
which could dilute the Privacy Act or hamstring tax
administration.
- 3 -
Cons
Opposition to legislation avoids recognition that Weicker-
Litton have a popular subject and will push aggressively for
some type of special legislation;
Opposition puts the President on the defensive in the face
of previously announced support for legislation on this
subject.
Option 2--Support legislation to codify restrictions on White House and
Congressional access, but oppose legislation which would serve to amend
the Privacy Act.
Pros
This option recognizes that agreement in principle exists
on restricting White House and Congressional access;
Legislation of this scope allows Privacy Act sanctioned
access to IRS records by Commerce, Justice, and also,
as justified, by other agencies;
Support for legislation places the President in a leadership
position, consistent with past actions.
Cons
(Same as for Option 1)
TAB B
#. FORD Erans
Tab B
PRESIDENTIAL PROCLAMATION ON CONSUMER RIGHTS OF PRIVACY
Background
Following formal action of the Privacy Committee, the Office of Consumer
Affairs, in the Fall of last year, developed a statement of consumer privacy
rights in consultation with business and consumer representatives. The purpose
of the statement was to provide one umbrella for implementing voluntary,
company by company initiatives in behalf of consumer privacy. This approach
was selected because of wide variations in record-keeping practices of companies
and the desire for prompt action pending further study on alternative approaches,
including legislation. Because of the varying methods of information use by
business, each subscribing company would issue and publicize its own imple-
menting policies. The Office of Consumer Affairs would be available to assist
companies in the implementation of the "code. 11 Subscribing companies would
keep and report statistics resulting from operations as a basis for evaluation
of the program.
A Presidential Proclamation would inaugurate the program. Because of
its voluntary nature, it would not have a basis in statutory law or a prior
Executive order. Instead, the President's inherent authority to seek voluntary
action from cooperating members of the private sector serves as the basis for
the Proclamation. Although this Proclamation was originally intended to be
issued in September or October 1974, it was determined to be in the President's
best interest to wait until some time after the November 1974 Congressional
elections and the conclusion of the 93rd Congress. Now that both events have
passed, companies and consumer groups are awaiting the issuance of the
Proclamation. In conjunction with a proposed Presidential signature ceremony,
the implementation plan includes having a number of top corporate executives
simultaneously participate by signing the "code" to initiate a drive for involving
other companies.
In the process of clearance, questions have been raised about the "code's"
potential effectiveness because of its generality, its relation to the Fair Credit
Reporting Act, and legal implications. A revision is being undertaken to
address these concerns and to emphasize more strongly the obligation of each
company to take effective steps to develop and publicize implementing policies
and practices. Senator Proxmire, in addition, has written the President
about the proposed Proclamation requesting more information and inquiring
about the Administration's stand on consumer privacy legislation.
LIBRARY
- 2 -
Issue
Should the Administration, via a Presidential Proclamation or some other
means, formally initiate a private sector voluntary program of self regulation
to protect consumer privacy rights in business records not covered by the
Fair Credit Reporting Act?
Pros
Fulfills expectations of groups having worked with the Office
of Consumer Affairs;
Provides a measure of immediate privacy protection while
buying time for further study by Administration and Congress
in face of growing threat of legislation;
Stabilizes a consensus on basic privacy principles in a sector
having widely varying practices in the handling of consumer
information;
Manifests leadership by the President;
Proclamation, or "code" can be strengthened to
emphasize implementation responsibilites.
Cons
Should properly be considered by new Privacy Protection Study
Commission;
Could be publicly construed as weaker approach that undercuts
Proxmire-Koch-Goldwater efforts for legislation;
Lacks formal policing mechanism and guaranteed remedies;
Opens door to uncertain legal consequences.
in FORD
TAB C
FORD LIBRARY
G7V830
MILITARY SURVEILLANCE LEGISLATION
Background
The Privacy Committee last year formally endorsed the concept of
legislation but withheld specific endorsement of the pending Ervin bill. Then
Vice President Ford expressed similar views in a letter to Senator Ervin
assuring him that DoD had been asked to prepare "needed substitute language. "
DoD developed an unofficial draft alternative but left others to advance it.
Late in the last Session the Ervin bill was reported to the full Judiciary Com-
mittee with no action taken. Senator Tunney, succeeding Senator Ervin
as Subcommittee Chairman, plans to push the Ervin bill. Congressman
Steelman, pursuant to action of the House Republican Privacy Task Force,
has introduced the Ervin bill. Continued press and civil libertarian interest
has been expressed not only in the facts surrounding the Army's surveillance
overseas of members of the Berlin Democratic Club (now a court case), but
in allegations that domestic military surveillance files have not been destroyed.
Issue
Should DoD be directed to undertake formal sponsorship of legislation to
codify its regulations banning military surveillance of civilian political activities?
Pros
Consistent with prior positions of the President and the
Privacy Committee;
Enhances public and Congressional credibility in Administration's
privacy initiatives;
Responds to Congressional and media interest in statutory
bans on unnecessary and illegal surveillance.
Cons
Opens up complex questions of permissible exceptions to
ban; could constrict DoD's flexibility in securing posts, bases,
and installations in the United States and overseas;
Risks tying hand of President to cope with any future domestic
disturbances;
Problem eliminated by regulations.
FORD
TAB D
GERALD B. FORD LIBAR
DRAFT - D.W. Metz 2/13/75
PRESIDENTIAL MESSAGE ON PRIVACY LEGISLATION
On the 12th of last August I pledged this Administration to hot pursuit
of tough laws to prevent unwarranted invasions of personal privacy, both in
and outside of government. The six intervening months have produced
substantial progress toward this objective. However, much remains to be
done.
Continued revelations of actual and alleged privacy violations have
roused public concern and produced hundreds of proposals at the Federal,
State and local levels to add new privacy legislation to the law books. The
protection of personal privacy will remain a priority issue for the immediate
future until needed legal and administrative safeguards are established to
protect what Justice Brandeis characterized as "the right most valued by
civilized men. 11
As we redouble our efforts to strengthen privacy protections, we must
be mindful that complete isolation and, hence, perfect privacy are not possible
in modern society. In pursuing privacy safeguards, therefore, we must
carefully weigh this against society's interests in freedom of information
about government activities, freedom of the press, law enforcement,
national defense and foreign policy and the business information needs of
the marketplace.
We have already made significant progress at the Federal level in
defining concepts and approaches to resolve situations in which conflicts
of
exist between privacy and other social values.
- 2 -
Recent Progress with Promise
The Administration and the Congress have taken important initial
steps toward curbing abuses and redressing imbalances in the administration
of laws that have led to unwarranted invasions of personal privacy.
A key development was the establishment early last year of the
Domestic Council Committee on the Right of Privacy to provide needed policy
formulation and coordination of various Executive branch initiatives. As
Vice President, I chaired that cabinet-level Committee, a responsibility
I have now given to Vice President Rockefeller. The Privacy Committee
quickly established communication with and among key Congressional
committees and Federal agencies, and helped stimulate a coordinated Federal
approach on nearly two dozen important privacy initiatives.
The results of this effort, and that of the positive partnership of many
individuals within and outside of government, have been significant. Adminis-
trative and legislative actions have included:
Rescission of an Executive order that gave the Department
of Agriculture direct access to the income tax returns of
farmers;
Cancellation of the FEDNET plan for a massive Federal
data network capable of linking the vast computerized files
of many Federal agencies;
FORD
- 3 -
Enactment of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy
Act guaranteeing student and parent access to school records
and restricting disclosures of such records;
Establishment of a new policy mandating Federal agency
privacy safeguard plans for new or modified computer and
telecommunications systems containing personal information;
and
Issuance of an Executive order restricting White House
access to income tax returns.
Regrettably, time and circumstances did not permit enactment of
needed new laws dealing with criminal justice information and Federal tax
records.
Early this year, following revelations of alleged charter transgressions
by the CIA, I appointed a Commission headed by the Vice President to conduct
a full inquiry and to report its findings and recommendations to me and to
the American people.
We have seen, in addition, efforts to broaden the scope of interest
in privacy protection to encompass State and local governments. A seminar
last December, sponsored by the Council of State Governments and the
Domestic Council Privacy Committee, revealed an intense interest in privacy
FORD
LIBERRY
- 4 -
protection on the part of State and local legislators and administrators, and
a desire to develop a coordinated strategy for its pursuit in Statehouses, city
halls and county governments all across the country. These efforts, moreover
have been extended to the private sector. Plans are now underway to seek
voluntary cooperation of private businesses in the protection of individual
privacy and confidentiality of personal information not now regulated by the
Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Of special significance is legislation I signed into law on December 31,
1974.
The Privacy Act of 1974
The Privacy Act of 1974 is a landmark statute and represents the first
codification of fundamental principles designed to safeguard privacy in the
collection of personal information by the Federal government.
It requires all Federal agencies (including the FBI and the CIA) annually
to identify publicly all systems of records they maintain about individuals;
thereby prohibiting secret record-keeping systems in the Federal government.
It establishes minimum standards of regulation for the gathering, use,
disclosure and security of personal information.
It guarantees to the individual, with some exceptions, the right to see
his record and to contest its accuracy, relevancy, timeliness and completenes
It establishes constraints on the disclosure of personal information by
agencies.
FORD
- 5 -
It provides administrative and judicial machinery for implementation of
its requirements, and civil remedies and criminal penalties for violations.
And it establishes a two-year Privacy Protection Study Commission to
review a wide range of public and private record systems not covered by the
Act and to recommend needed changes in laws or regulations that will better
protect personal privacy.
Of course, legislation of this type and complexity cannot be completely
free of imperfections, at - I will not hesitate, based upon assessments of
operational experience under the Act, to urge needed amendments to assure
the full realization of its objectives.
Toward Privacy Protection for All Americans
The Privacy Act of 1974 and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy
Act are major achievements that reflect months of reasoned debate and con-
sultation between the Congress and the Executive branch. Now, as we turn
to other important pieces of privacy legislation, I am confident that the same
cooperative spirit will prevail.
Because we live today in a society in which bigness and complexity
are the rule -- where big organizations and complicated laws and regulations
have a profound effect on our everyday lives -- decency, fairness and
straightforwardness, which in turn build confidence and trust, are now more
valuable than ever. As a people we must have confidence that our political
- 6 -
and social institutions are serving us well. We must be able not only to
trust what they tell us, but to hold them accountable when they fail to keep
their promises.
Laws and administrative actions to protect personal privacy are
means of building such trust and accountability. They aim to assure the
American people that institutions that collect, record, and use personal
information about them do so openly and according to established rules.
They seek to define areas of an individual's private life that are immune
from trespass without his consent. They attempt to give the individual
a central role in determining whether information about him is accurate and
complete, and to hold record-keeping institutions to any promises they make
not to disclose personal information to someone else.
Of course, some trading off is always necessary. Information
gathering for law enforcement purposes, for example, cannot be so open as
to allow criminals to stay one step ahead of the police. Sometimes an
individual would prefer that a government agency, or a bank, or a credit
bureau use information in a record about him rather than make him fill out
still another form. And some individuals would prefer having their Social
Security numbers available to anyone who wants them so that they will not
be confused with the other John and Mary Smiths who live down the street
and across town.
During the next few months, I shall submit to the Congress a series
of legislative proposals to protect these and other personal privacy
LIBRARY
- 7 -
interests in areas that either were not addressed in legislation enacted
last session, or were not addressed in enough detail.
Specifically:
To help protect the first Amendment rights of American
citizens, I am requesting the enactment of legislation to
codify existing regulations prohibiting military surveillance
of civilian political activities.
To encourage the proper exchange of criminal justice
information while providing safeguards for personal privacy
interests, I will urge the Congress to enact HR-61. This
comprehensive bill would help provide the necessary balance
between the legitimate needs of authorized agencies to have
access to criminal justice information and the Constitutionally
guaranteed privacy rights of an individual, and it would
provide civil sanctions and criminal penalties for the
unauthorized use of such information.
To curtail the accelerating use of the Social Security number
as a personal identifier, and thus to ward off the danger of
uncontrolled leakage of information on individuals and wide-
spread easy access to it, I am proposing a statutory clarification
of the authorized uses of the Social Security number. This
proposal will extend and strengthen safeguards already provided
in the Privacy Act of 1974.
- 8 -
To protect the confidentiality of information that taxpayers
furnish to the Internal Revenue Service, the Treasury
Department asked the 93rd Congress to amend the Internal
Revenue Code to restrict by statute the authority to inspect
returns and to disclose taxpayer information. While time
did not permit the Congress to act on the Treasury proposal,
I ask your strong support for a similar proposal that I plan
to introduce this session.
To assure that customer records maintained by banks and
financial institutions are kept confidential and free from
unauthorized use or transfer, I shall propose a new law that
balances the confidentiality interests of consumers against
legitimate Federal agency needs for access to records about
their finances.
To help assure that accurate reports on individuals are
maintained and furnished by credit reporting companies, I
shall ask the Congress to enact legislation amending and
strengthening the Fair Credit Reporting Act of 1970. Although
passage of this Act represented an important step forward, it
clearly did not do enough to protect the personal privacy of
credit users.
- 9 -
To protect the personal privacy of the dependent poor in our
society, I shall ask the Congress to revise recent amendments
to the Social Security Act which put the Federal government in
the role of enforcing alimony and child support obligations and
which substantially undermine longstanding protections for
the confidentiality of public assistance and social service
case records.
I shall request your support for legislation prohibiting cable
television operators from disclosing information on the viewing
habits of their subscribers, except pursuant to a court order.
Finally, I shall support legislation to assure that people who
provide information about themselves for scientific studies
and surveys will not have to worry about that information
being used for any other purpose.
In connection with these legislative recommendations, I will also
provide several new privacy protections by executive order. I intend, for
example, to issue an order to strengthen existing safeguards for the privacy
rights of Federal employees. Also, I will rescind Executive Order 9397
which directs Federal agencies to use the Social Security number as a record
identifier.
FORD
CERRED
- 10 -
Other Privacy Concerns
I have not mentioned the important work of the National Wiretap
Commission nor dwelt on the work of the Commission to investigate the
activities of the Central Intelligence Agency within the United States, or
the current investigations of intelligence agencies by the Congress. However,
I shall act quickly after receiving and studying their recommendations.
Consistent with my pledge of August 12, 1974, this Administration will
not tolerate illegal and unwarranted encroachments on Constitutionally
protected privacy rights in the name of national security.
Moreover, when I speak of including privacy protections in future
legislation, I'm not talking only about the specific legislation I have recom-
mended here. The citizens' right to personal privacy should be recognized
in every piece of social legislation, and I urge the Congress to be vigilant
in assuring that it is. My call in this message for legislation protecting
the privacy interests of the dependent poor, for example, would be
unnecessary if privacy considerations had been built into the 1972 and 1974
Amendments to the Social Security Act.
The widespread clamor for action will not simply evaporate. We
cannot stand idly by, winking at reported abuses. Advances so recently
made in behalf of personal privacy are unparalleled, considering the need
and complexities associated with augmenting privacy protections in today's
society. Indeed, I expect that someday history books will talk about the
- 11 -
last quarter of the 20th Century as a time in which new ways of organizing
and transacting the business of our everyday lives captured the attention
of the American people; as a time in which old values and new ways of doing
things at first appeared to clash, but in which the American people and
their leaders also strove mightily, and successfully, to assure that no
matter how big and fast and complicated things got in our dealings with one
another, we would never abandon our fundamental commitment to decency
and fairness and candor. To me, preserving such virtues is what the
protection of personal privacy is all about. It is an honor to be a partner
with you in this effort for the common good of all our people.
LIBBAR
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 11, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR ROBERT T. HARTMANN
FROM:
LYNN MAY
SUBJECT:
Privacy Speech
The attached draft was prepared by the Domestic Council Committee on
the Right of Privacy. I believe that its main points--the threat of big
government to individual privacy and the need to develop affirmative
means to strengthen the right of privacy--are the fundamental under-
pinnings of the President's privacy program. They also add another
dimension to the President's efforts to reduce the pervasive influence
of the Federal government and promote regulatory reform.
The link between the right of privacy and the campaign against big
government is a delicate one, however, because many of the vocal
privacy constituency tend to be liberal on most other issues, I believe
that the attached draft establishes this link without turning off the
privacy constituency by heavy handed rhetoric.
Attachment
bee: Phis Bucken
GERALD FORD
DOMESTIC COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHT OF PRIVACY
WASHINGTON. D.C 20504
September 11, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
LYNN MAY
FROM:
QUINCY RODGERS
QR
SUBJECT:
Privacy Speech
As per our discussion, attached is a draft of remarks for
consideration for a Presidential speech, prepared by Bob
Belair and reviewed by other members of the staff. In the
short time available, we have tried to concentrate on ideas
rather than style, leaving the latter for the proven skill
of the speech writers.
This speech stresses the development of the very important
notion of the link between big government, which concentrates
upon control of its services and government's consequent forget-
fullness about privacy. It also addresses the Privacy Act
of 1974, a timely event since the Act will shortly be effective.
One can only do so much in a speech, of course.
However, there is a broader area which the President may wish
to address at this time. Such a speech would increase emphasis
on the role of science and technology in the breach of privacy.
Additionally, it might focus on other things now underway with-
in the government which bear on questions of privacy and
governmental control. It would frame appropriate responses
(to be worked out in conjunction with the various governmental
officials concerned) to the following kinds of related events:
1) The series of hearings now underway in the Senate
Judiciary Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights on
the impact of science and technology on individual
rights-which are focusing on
a) The Ford Rowen charges
b) The emergency preparedness procedures of
government agencies.
2) The revelations of telephone intercepts by NSA
3) The activities of the Senate CIA Committee. Senator
Church has repeatedly used rhetoric which casts atherd
concerns about over-bearing government and thesintegricy LIBIA,
intelligence investigation against a backdrop of
of our democratic programs. With public hearings now
announced and with the possibility of newspaper
columns ( James Reston rumored) in such themes,
more attention will be paid to them.
4) The executive branch activity on intelligence
activities and the drafting of guidelines by
the Department of Justice for FBI activity. The
Attorney General received favorable comment for
this. The President might also.
There is no end to the privacy issues that can be addressed.
But these four particularly troublesome areas will bear
watching.
Also, we are continuing with our plans to develop a number
of our programs in a way which stresses their importance
to themes of individuality.
DRAFT OUTLINE OF SPEECH ON INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY
GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS, AND PRIVACY
I.
In each period of our history the nation must meet important
challenges (viz. political security in the first hundred years,
economic security in the second century).
II.
In the third century we're faced with a new challenge: How
can we effectively govern an increasingly large and complex
society. without sacrificing individual liberty and personal
freedom.
III.
Our answer to this question must be guided by two fundamental
principles.
A.
Wherever possible we should seek ways to limit
government regulation and involvement. Less
government means less information that's
collected, less monitoring of individuals, fewer
expectations and requirements on individuals'
conduct and thus more personal freedom and
dignity.
B.
We must seek affirmative means to define and
strengthen the right of privacy. Privacy sets
boundaries for government intrusion and gives
people more control of their lives.
IV.
Less government and more privacy will strike a new balance
between needs of the government and society, and needs of
the individual and will preserve and build the kind of individual
liberty that's basic to our democracy.
DRAFT OF SPEECH ON INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY, GOVERNMENT
DEREGULATION AND PRIVACY
(Introductory Remarks)
In every period of our history this country has had
to confront and overcome great challenges. In our first
hundred years we met the challenge of gaining independence,
defining our social and political compact, and securing our borders.
In our second hundred years we industrialized the nation and
achieved unprecedented economic prosperity. As we begin our
third century we perceive a new challenge, a challenge that strikes
at the core of our philosophic and political tenets.
Simply put the challenge is this: How do we effectively
govern an increasingly large, complex and highly organized
society without sacrificing our personal liberty and freedom?
Our answer to this question will go a long way toward determining
the kind of society that we will pass on to future generations.
It is not immodest to note that our nation in its first
two hundred years has achieved a remarkable record. We have
been strong militarily. We have been productive economically.
We have provided most of our citizens with a better quality of
life than can be found anywhere else in the world. And let
us never forget that we have done this while constructing a
democracy that truly does rest on fundamental values of
individual liberty and freedom.
Today, however, we face a new challenge. As our
society grows larger, as our economy becomes more complex and as
local, state and Federal governments impose more and more
- 2 -
economic and social regulation, and provide more and more
vital services it becomes increasingly difficult to preserve
individual liberty. For example --
Can we control our soaring crime rate
and avail ourselves of modern law enforcement
methods without sacrificing fundamental rights
of citizenship.
Can we find ways to ensure our internal and
external security without engaging in practices
that impinge on First Amendment rights?
Can we as a society operate and coordinate
our vast industrial and economic capability
without stifling competition, smothering
entrepreneurial opportunities and limiting
the economic freedom of our citizens?
Can we properly administer our tax system
without collecting or using information
in ways that invade individuals' privacy?
Can we effectively administer a multitude of
licensing and certification programs ranging
from drivers' licenses to certification of
physicians and surgeons without drastically
infringing on individuals freedom and privacy?
- 3 -
And finally can we offer government gifts, loans,
subsidies, credits and a host of other benefit
programs without imposing unacceptable burdens
on the privacy, integrity and freedom of the
individual citizen?
Preserving and strengthening individual liberty in
the environment of a modern state will not be easy but it is
vital. If we are to be successful we must frame our effort around
two overarching principles.
First we must seek whenever possible to limit the
degree of governmental regulation and involvement in our
lives. Second, we must find affirmative ways to strengthen the
individuals' right of privacy and in so doing strengthen personal
freedom and liberty.
There are many good reasons at this point in our nation's
history for us to attempt to limit the size and scope of government
activity. As regards many industries, there are good economic
reasons for reducing the extent of government regulation. In
regard to some government sponsored benefit programs there are
not only good economic, but good administrative and social reasons
for re-examining the size and the nature of these programs.
But tonight I address an ever more compelling reason for attempting
to limit our massive governmental welfare and regulatory
apparatus. We must face one simple, inescapable fact: The
larger government gets, the more it does or trys to do for
its citizens, the more it intrudes into our lives and
regulates our lives.
- 4 -
Today our government is far larger than it was at
the beginning of this century, it does far more for us
than it did at the beginning of this century. But who
will deny that it also exerts far more influence and
control over our lives than it did in years past? In early
times the governments' principle expectation for citizen
behavior was simply that the individual act in a lawful
way. But today, in a society of governmental largess, a
citizen's behavior is reviewed not only for criminal
activity but also to examine eligibility for receipt of
government controlled benefits. The government has an
interest in monitoring the activities of a citizen receiving
social security benefits or unemployment benefits, or
welfare payments. The same is true for a student on scholarship,
a businessman receiving government loans or holding government
licenses, or a professional person regulated by a quasi-
governmental association. Each time we construct a government
benefit or regulatory program we give up a little bit of
personal liberty in the bargain. This does not mean that
we should abandon all forms of governmental regulation or
benefits. Our benefit programs provide humanitarian and
indispensable help to the sick, the aged, the needy, the
young, the unemployed and the disadvantaged. Our conscience
and our common sense demand continued committment to the
concept of some public social and regulatory programs. But
we must assess the true costs of many of these programs
- 5 -
in terms of their impact on personal liberty and dignity.
At the same time we must implement a second principle.
We must find affirmative ways to broaden and strenghten the
right of privacy. Privacy encompasses and protects individual
liberty. It gives greater control of personal information
about ourselves. It further helps to define those areas
of action that are personal and so important to the indi-
vidual that government and society cannot intrude.
The right of privacy is recognized in the First
Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Sixth
Amendment and Ninth Amendment to our Constitution. The
concept of privacy is part of our common law and is articulated
in numerous civil and criminal statutes. Confidential treatment
of private information; proper treatment of personally
identifiable information; freedom from arbitrary searches;
freedom from compelled self incrimination; privacy in the
home; privacy in relations with family members, clergymen
and other intimate or important associations; freedom to
make basic decisions about our lives; are all parts of the
right of privacy.
September 27th of this year will mark the effective
date of important privacy legislation. The 1974 Privacy
Act is an attempt to provide privacy protections for the Federal
government's collection, maintenance and use of personally
identifiable information. The Act requires the Federal
government to disclose the existence of every data system
- 6 -
that contains personally identifiable information. It
generally prohibits collection of information concerning
individuals' exercise of First Amendment rights. It requires
that files on individuals be accurate, relevant, timely and
complete. The Act gives everyone the opportunity to read
his file and make corrections or rebuttals. It commands
the government to use information only for the purpose for which
This Act is an experiment. Perhaps we will have to find yet better ways to
it was collected. Finally it establishes an independent
Privacy Protection Study Commission with a two year mandate
to investigate a number of important privacy issues and
present a report and recommendations to Congress.
Federal agencies and the Office of Management and
handle this information. But we are making a start.
Budget are making a valiant effort to comply with this Act.
Agency notices published in the Federal Register over the
last month identify thousands of data systems containing
identifiable information about citizens and consume tens
of thousands of pages in the Federal Register. The disclosure
of such a massive record keeping operation is admittedly
disconcerting but it is also a necessary step in our efforts
to better assess and control our record keeping practices
This Administration will make every effort to insure that
Federal agencies make a sincere and active effort to faith-
fully implement this legislation.
The specific protections in the Privacy Act make
a
contribution to the privacy rights of all of us. In addition
to this the Privacy Act reflects a growing awareness of a
basic principle of informational privacy. This legislation
- 7 -
at least in part, embodies the concept that
citizens have a cognizable interest in the collection and use
of information about them. In a society as complex and highly
organized as ours, information has become a vital resource and
commodity. In the years to come this development will undoubtedly
intensify. Our nation can increasingly be characterized
not so much as an industrial society but as an informational
society Let it be noted that in 1974 and 1975 we took the
first steps to re-establish the individual's control over the
use of his personal information.
The Privacy Act also represents an effort by the
representatives of the American people to make the Federal
bureaucracy accountable to the people for the information
it collects and maintains. The size of our government and its
impact on the lives of every citizen makes it imperative that
the people, through their representatives, make the government
responsible and accountable. The Privacy Act is one specific
and clear accomplishment toward this goal.
The Privacy Act is an important first step in establishing
affirmative protections on individual privacy. But it is a first
step. The nation's agenda of needed privacy related measures
is a full one. One important next step will be the passage
of legislation to strengthen the confidentiality of Federal income
tax records. Every one of the nation's taxpayers ought to be
able to rest assured that his or her income tax records is
a private matter between that person and the Internal Revenue
Service. Last year I signed an Executive order limiting
- 8 -
executive office access to tax files. Legislation of the
kind that the Congress is now considering is needed to
broaden and institutionalize confidentiality protections
on tax records that cannot be accomplished through Executive
order.
Other important issues await our attention.
The Congress must take responsible action to regulate
the difficult area of law enforcement record keeping. Work
remains to be done in the area of bank records and
electronic transfer of financial information; in the area of
medical records; credit records; and as regards the use of
electronic surveillance. We want to share our recent
experience with the 1974 Privacy Act with leaders in state and
local government and the private sector. In so doing we can
contribute to their effort to define the proper standards
for informational privacy, in state local and private sector
record keeping. We need to look at the individual in all of
his societal roles--as family member, as employee, as patient,
as consumer and in other basic roles--and ask ourselves if we
have yet achieved a satisfactory degree of privacy, individual
liberty and human dignity. This Administration will continue
to propose and support affirmative measures to strengthen our
vital rights of privacy.
-9-
The challenge is to effectively govern our large and
highly organized society without sacrificing individual liberty.
This will require all of our skill - all of our attention.
It will require your efforts, as guardians of the law. But this
is a challenge which I believe we can meet.
America has always cherished the notion that she provides
a model for the world. The Pilgrims saw themselves as a "City
on a Hill." The Founding Fathers were aware that a monarchical
Europe watched the experiment they were attempting. So long
as we guard against the arrogant notion that we have all of the
answers for the peoples of the globe, it can be a healthy thing
for us to become aware again of the power and responsibility
of example. In this frame of mind, let us enter the future.