I read this article and just thought that everyone must read this.
The article tells how moronic and uneducated the so called Prestigious
U.S. Senators are. Enjoy!

Thank Ivy League for this
______________________________________________________________________________

From the April 1994 Issue of PC Computing

John C. Dvorak

Trust Congress? Not With This Unbelievable Lair of Slop

WHEN VICE PRESIDENT GORE BEGAN TALKING ABOUT THE Information
High was, we all knew that the bureaucrats would get
involved more than we like. In fact, it may already be too
late to stop a horrible Senate bill from becoming law.
        The moniker---Information Highway---itself seems to
be responsible for SB #040194. Introduced by Senator Patrick
Leahy, it's designed to prohibit anyone from using a public
computer network {Information Highway} while the computer
user is intoxicated. I know how silly this sounds, but
Congress apparently thinks that being drunk in any highway
is bad no matter what kind of highway it is. The bill is
expected pass this month.
     There already are rampant arguments as to how this
proposed law can possibly be enforced. The FBI hopes to use
as a excuse to do routine wiretaps on any computer if there
is evidence that the owner "uses or abuses alcohol and has
access to a modem." Note that it slips the word uses. This
means if you're been seen drinking one lone beer, you can
have your line tapped.
     Because this law would be so hard to enforce, police
officials are drooling over the prospect of easily obtaining
to do wiretaps. Ask enforcement officials in Washington and
they'll tell you the proposed law is idiotic, but none will
oppose it. Check the classified ads in the Washington Post
and you'll find the FBI, National Security Agency, and
something called the Online Enforcement Agency (when did
they set that up?) all soliciting experts in phone
technology, specifically wiretapping.
     It gets worse. The congressional Record or February 19,
1994, has a report that outlines the use of computerized
BBSes, Internet Inter-Relay Chat, and CompuServe CB as
"propagating illicit sexual encounters and meetings between
couples--any of whom are underage. . . . Even people
purporting to routinely have sex with animal s are present
on these systems to foster their own odd beliefs on the
public-at-large." A rider on SB #040194 makes it a felony to
discuss sexual matters on any public-access network,
including the Internet, America Online, and Compu Serve.
     I wondered how private companies such as America Online
could be considered Public-access networks, so I called
Senator Barbara Boxer's  office and talked to an aide, a
women named Felicia. She said the use of promotional cards
the give away a free hour or two of service constitutes
public access. You know, like the ones found in the back of
books or in modem boxes. She also told me most BBS systems
fall under this proposed statute. When asked how they
propose to enforce this law, she said it's not Congress's
problem. "Enforcement works itself out over time," she said.
     The group fighting over this moronic law is led by
Jerome Bernstein of the Washington law firm of Bernstein,
Bernstein, and Knowles (the firm that took Ollie North as a
client). I couldn't get in touch with any one the cosponsors
of the bill (including Senator Ted Kennedy, if you can
believe it!), but Bernstein was glad to talk. "These people
have no clue about the Information Highway or what it does.
The whole thing got started last Christmas during an
antidrinking campaign in Washington, D.C., metro area,"
Bernstein said. "I'm convinced that someone jokingly told
Leahy's office about drunk driving on the Information
Highway and the idea snowballed. These senators actually
think there is a physical highway. Seriously Senator Pat
Moynihan asked me if you need a driving permit to 'drive' a
modem on the Information Highway! He was no clue what a
modem is, and neither does rest of the Congress."
     According to Bernstein, the antisexual wording in the
last bill was attributed to Kennedy's office. "Kennedy
thought that technology was leaving him behind, and he
wanted to be perceived as more up-to-date technologically.
He also though this would make ammends for his alleged
philandering."
     Unfortunately, the public is not much better informed
than the Senate. The Gallup Organization, at the behest of
Congress, is polling the public regarding intoxication while
using a computer online "hot chatting." The results are
chilling. More than half of the public thinks that using a
computer while intoxicated should be illegal! The result of
the sexuality poll are not available. But one question
"Should a teenaged boy be encouraged to pretend he is a girl
while chatting with another person online?" has a civil
rights activist alarmed. According to Kevin Avril of the
ACLU, "This activity doesn't even qualify as a virtual cross-
dressing. Who cares about this stuff? What are we going to
do? Legislate an anti-boys-will-be-boys law. It sets a bad
precedent."
     I could go on and on with quotes and complaints from
the people regarding this bill. But most of the complaints
are getting nowhere. Pressure groups, such as the one lead
by Baptist ministers from De Kalb County, Georgia, are
supporting the law with such vehemence that they've managed
to derail an effort by modem manufactures (the biggest being
Georgia based Hayes) to lobby against the law. "Who wants to
come out and support drunkenness and computer sex?" asked a
congressmen who requested anonymity.
     So, except for Bernstein, Bernstein, and Knowles, and a
few members of the ACLU, there is nothing to stop this bill
from becoming law. You can register your protests with your
congressperson or Ms. Lirpa Sloof in the Senate Legislative
Analysts Office. Her name spelled backward says it all.