September 11, 1969

Hon. Paul N. McCloskey
House of Representatives
Washington, B. C.

Dear Pete:

I did want to put in writing my concern about two issues that will probably

be before the House during this session: one, the Class Action Jurisdiction
Act of 1969, which was introduced by Bob Eckhardt as H.R. 11656. You mentioned
that you had considerable experience of your own in litigating ections of

this kind and this can only provoke the suggestion that you might be able to
give it some very well informed attention. Apart from the inherent merits of
this approach, I have the hope and expectation that it may fill an important
gap in public redrese on environmental issues. A recent law graduate,

Mr. John E. Bryson, who is now a clerk for Judge Stanley Weigal in the U.S.
District Court, pointed out that such a class action was pursued by the

"Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference". If it could be a matter of particu-
lar interest to you I can either dig up more material on this or ask Mr. Bryson
to get in touch with you. I also enclose a memo from Professor Jack Friedenthal
of our law school commenting on the purposes of the bill in question.

Two, the fair credit reporting act, with which I believe you are alseady quite
familiar. The Senate version of this is S$. 823, and I believe it has also
been introduced in the House. The problem of unfair and unguarded manipulation
of course extends much more widely than this, but it seems to me that this
particular legislation is a very sound first step in learning how to manage

the problem.

In this general connection, I am also very much concerned about the enormous
potential for abuse that exists in the records held by the Selective Service
System, as well as by the armed services. The Garrison example was only one
illustration of what may come to be a much more pervasive threat hanging over
the heads of any citizen who may have had occasion for psychiatric consultation
or similar medical advice, either during military service or as a basis for
draft deferment. I am aware that the agency regulations are intended to pro-
tect the privacy of such records, but I believe this does not go far enough,
and that the Congremgs ought to undertake specific legal sanctfions to be sure

7M

AANSO109W
 

Hon. Paul N. McCloskey September 11, 1969
Page 2

that any abuses are aggressively prosecuted. In view of the rather prevarious
administration of selective service records in general, there is a rather

special threat that confidential information on registrants can become avail-
able to employers and others in the local community who in a different capacity
have legitimate needs for such personal information. I would suggest that it

is not enough that the agency regulations forbid the disclosure of these data,

for the regulations can be changed at any time by executive action, and furthar-
more there is no way to assure that they will be uniformly and fairly implemented.

The federal privacy act that Representative Ed Koch has introduced (H. 1303)
probably stands very little chance of being passed because it would put roughly
the same limitations on federal government intelligence on personal data aa
does the fair credit reporting act on the credit bureaus. However, I hope you
can lend your support towards at least ventilating the issues raised by this
bill to determine the extent to which the federal government can and should
maintain the kind of infermation that this bill seeks to regulate. I know
how vehemently you have expressed yourself on quastions of personal privacy

as related to the census, which historically has been quite free from any
actual abuse of personal information, and I hope you can apply the same logic
to situations where thie is a very much more realistic hazard.

I will be in touch with you further about other issues raised during our meeting
last week, which I did enjoy very much.

Sincerely yours,

Joshua Lederberg
Professor of Genetics