[Grovenet] Digest, Vol 18, Issue 12 morphed with data collection

[allnutt]

Good point Joy.
Also it is good to keep in mind some of the basic reasons that led to the 
founding of this country.
Way back then the British were able to control many aspects of people's 
lives. Too many according to our founding fathers.  So, they set up the 
government with only limited powers.  Any power that the federal government 
was going to have, had to be given to them.  The feds could have what was 
given to them and only what was given to them. Everything else went to the 
states and the people themselves.
The feds could get power or information if they had a 'reason to know' and 
that power was under the scrutiny of the courts (to make sure they didn't go 
beyond the constitution) and subject to the balancing of the congress as 
well.
What is happening today seems to be a fracturing of opinion along these 
lines:
A) It is not that big of a deal that Bush wants to collect patterns of data 
that could help catch terrorists so who cares how he does it.
B) When the president has an option to do something legally vs. doing the 
same thing illegally why does he prefer to do it the illegal way, when it 
would be so simple to work with the courts and congress to get what he wants 
in the first place.

To me it boils down to how he wants to get his power and how he wants to use 
it.  I don't have a problem with Bush collecting some data but why trust a 
guy who would rather do it with absolutely no oversight and no one to temper 
his uses for it.  Humans have a tendency to abuse power if they aren't 
stopped in some fashion.  I don't mean this as a slam against Bush, because 
I believe that any one of us would be tempted to cross the line into 
political shenanigans if we thought we could not get caught.  Bush is no 
different and he is amusing when he asks us to trust him that this data is 
only going to be used as it should so he doesn't any oversight from anybody. 
The famous 'trust but verify' rings true here as well.  I just want the 
verify component to be available.

The other thing that people tend to forget is that there is a fundamental 
difference in dealings between essentially private parties (like in a real 
estate deal) where each side has roughly equal capabilities and power vs. 
when the big huge government who controls armies deals with citizens.  The 
constitution is (or was) to protect citizens from the awesome power that the 
government could bring to bear upon individuals because it wasn't a fair 
match.  So, you have to be careful in comparing getting utility records to 
evaluate a business deal between two people, which  inherently makes the 
deal more fair and comparing that to a huge powerful government who already 
can squash you if they choose to, collecting more data to squash you 
further.  Data collection in the first case keeps things equal, but in the 
second it takes a mismatch and makes it more of a mismatch.

When they wrote the constitution they seemed to understand the difference 
between individuals dealing with each other and governments dealing with 
citizens because they had experience with big governments being unfair to 
citizens.
History is fascinating when you study it but I fear that this president gets 
concepts confused in his mind and does not understand the principle behind 
why people are upset.   He doesn't see the bigger picture. He is so narrowly 
focused on some nebulous 'enemy' that he can't see the shredding of the 
constitution in the process.


Katie

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <JBlair2154 at aol.com>
To: <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 8:55 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Re: GroveNet Digest, Vol 18, Issue 12


> Thanks for the welcomes, Beth and Katie.
> This format is a little tricky for me to follow, since I can't  always
> remember who said what --unless I take the time to scroll back and back 
> and back,
> and I'm far too impatient to do that.  LOL
> But I do have a couple of minor comments regarding the discussion  I'm
> reading. First, the question of a utility company allowing others to see a
> customer's records. Personally, I think it's important for a potential 
> home  buyer to
> have the facts regarding the energy requirements of a particular home.  My
> husband and I have asked for this information in the past, in other 
> states,  and
> the realtor has had no problem providing it. I think in these cases, the
> realtor merely asked to see the homeowner's records and wrote down the 
> highest
> amount paid, something like that. Of course, this means a prospective 
> buyer must
> trust the realtor to be truthful, and in some cases, the homeowner might
> refuse  to cooperate. (This would instantly make me feel the utility bills 
> must
> be very  high.) So I guess my stance on this issue is that it would be 
> okay for
> a utility  company to provide a year's worth of records to prospective 
> buyers
> of an  existing home. The entire security vs privacy issue, in fact, may
> hinge around  the buzz phrase my husband taught me during his Air Force 
> career:
> "Need to  Know."  If someone has a legitimate "need to know" certain 
> facts,
> then  privacy issues must take a back seat. Otherwise, it's "NOYB". In 
> other
> words,  your right to extend your fist stops at my nose.
>
> Joy
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>