ATTACHMENTS

(1) "Privacy Threats Worry Americans," New York Times, 12-8-83 (Harris Poll finds increasing concern);

(2) "Probing the Capitol's Drug Store," Privacy Journal, 9-83 (release of list of prescription drugs supplied to Members of Congress and Justices of the Supreme Court);

(3) Ad for computerized pharmacy information;

(4) "IRS Starts Hunt for Tax Evaders, Using Mail-Order Concerns' Lists," New York Times, 12-25-83;

(5) "I.R.S. Seeks Links to County Computers in Texas to Find Debtors," New York Times, 3-13-84;

(6) "The High-Tech Threat to Your Privacy," Changing Times, April 1983;

(7) "In Defense of Privacy in U.S.," New York Times, 1-21-84 (profile of witness Robert Ellis Smith);

(8) "Privacy and Videotex Systems," Byte, July 1983 (threats to privacy from home video and computing services).

[From the New York Times, Dec. 8, 1983]

PRIVACY THREATS WORRY AMERICANS

MANY IN SURVEY BELIEVE DATA ON TAXES AND TELEPHONES ARE NOT KEPT SECRET

(By Adam Clymer)

Washington, December 7.-Americans are increasingly concerned about threats to privacy, and about a third of the public believes the Internal Revenue Service, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and telephone companies “probably share" information on individuals with others, according to a poll conducted by Louis Harris and Associates.

Results of the Sept. 1-11 survey of 1,256 people, paid for by Southern New England Telephone Company, were released today as the Smithsonian Institution opened a four-day symposium on "The Road After 1984: High Technology and Human Freedom."

Participants will examine various aspects of society in light of George Orwell's novel "1984," which foresaw an almost all-powerful government.

The telephone poll found the percentage of Americans who said they were "very concerned" about threats to personal privacy increased from 31 percent in 1978 to 48 percent in 1983. It found four Americans in five believed it would be easy for someone to assemble a master file on their lives that would violate their privacy.

SHARING OF INFORMATION

The poll found that 84 percent of the public thought it would be a serious violation of privacy if the revenue service did not keep tax returns confidential, and 82 percent thought it would be serious if the F.B.I. did not keep its data secret.

When asked what they thought actually happened to such data, 36 percent of the respondents said they thought the revenue service shared information and 38 percent said they believed the F.B.I. did. Thirty-three percent said they thought phone companies shared data, although 25 percent said phone companies did not have any information that mattered.

Those agencies were trusted more than several other institutions presented. Fifty percent of the public thought public opinion research concerns shared data, and 51 percent said the Census Bureau, banks and government welfare agencies did so. Fifty-seven percent said they believed insurance companies shared their information, 65 percent said this of loan companies and 75 percent said credit bureaus shared information with others.

Along with the telephone sample of the 1,256 people, the pollsters also interviewed 100 leaders in each of four categories: members of Congress and their aides, corporate executives, science editors and school superintendents. In general, those groups were less fearful of major invasions of privacy than the public was.

LEADERS' OPINIONS DIFFERED

For example, 86 percent in the sample of the public thought it was possible that "a government in Washington will use confidential information to intimidate individuals or groups it feels are its enemies," and 70 percent said that was "likely."

All four leadership groups also said such a development was possible, by about the same percentages as the public. But just 24 percent of the congressional group, 37 percent of the executives, 56 percent of the editors and 39 percent of the school superintendents said it was "likely."

Mr. Harris, chairman and founder of the polling concern, commenting on the findings at a news conference, said he believed "the leadership is far less alerted to the dangers than the people are."

"Those at the throttle of our political leadership just haven't given it much thought," he said.

[From the Privacy Journal, September 1983, vol. IX, No. 11]

PROBING THE CAPITOL'S DRUG STORE

The Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts do not apply to the legislative branch, but some members of Congress may find their privacy diminished because of a court decision involving an anomaly on Capitol Hill.

There is in the Capitol an attending physician to tend to the aches and pains of members and staff. This is a Congressional office, but the physician's office gets its pharmaceutical drugs from the National Naval Medical Center, part of the executive branch. The current Congressional physician is a Navy admiral.

A persistent journalist named Irwin Arieff has requested under the Freedom of Information Act the list of prescription drugs that have been supplied by the Navy to members of Congress and Supreme Court justices over a six-year period. Arieff agreed that the Navy could delete any information that would possibly reveal particular individuals for whom a drug had been prescribed. The Navy refused his request, saying that even from cumulative information it would be possible to figure out what drugs were prescribed for particular individuals or at least for particular ailments.

The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in a unanimous decision this summer, ruled that this "mere possibility" could not prevent the disclosure of the information Arieff is seeking. The court agreed with the journalist that the public has an interest in knowing the quantities of medicine dispensed without charge to Senators, Representatives, and others, as well as whether members are receiving drugs found to be uneffective by the Food and Drug Administration. Judge Antonin Scalia, a former University of Chicago law professor and Assistant Attorney General who is an expert in the Freedom of Information Act, found "justifiable concern" that some members of Congress will be victims of unfair speculation, but said he had no choice but to order the release of information unless there was an actual, not possible, invasion of privacy. Arieff v. Department of the Navy, 82–1536 (D.C. Cir. July 22, 1983).

The Department of Justice Civil Division routinely planned to ask the Court of Appeals for a rehearing, but this month asked the court for a 30-day extension in submitting its petition for rehearing "because a number of members of Congress have expressed concern" about the matter. In fact, according to the attorney handling the appeal, the concern came from the counsel for the Senate, a staff member. Michael Davidson, the counsel, told PRIVACY JOURNAL that there had been no special concern raised since the court decision but that when the litigation began, the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House, both staffers, stated their concern to the Navy and asked the Navy to protect the interests of Congressional staff and members.

[From the New York Times, Dec. 25, 1983]

IRS STARTS HUNT FOR TAX EVADERS, Using Mail-Order CONCERNS' LISTS

(By David Burnham)

WASHINGTON, December 24.-The Internal Revenue Service has obtained a computerized mail-order list of the estimated incomes of two million American households and has begun to test whether it can help track down people who fail to pay their taxes.

The service is conducting the test despite the refusal of the three major companies that develop such information to provide the Government with a list and over the objections of their trade organization, the Direct Marketing Association.

Alexander Hoffman, who is the chairman of the board of the association and a group vice president at Doubleday & Company, said the sale of the list to the I.R.S. violated a provision in the group's code of ethics that lists should be rented only for marketing and could "upset an important segment of the economy."

The revenue service said a brokerage firm that provides marketing lists, the Dunhill Company of Washington, D.C., had put together the names the agency sought. The association said the company was not one of its members. Officials at the company did not return several telephone calls, but the revenue service spokesman said the names had been put together from several small concerns.

BROOKLYN INCLUDED IN TEST

In the test, a commercially prepared list of two million households in Brooklyn, in Wisconsin, Indiana and Nevada will be matched against an I.R.S. list of people living in these areas who filed income tax returns for the tax year 1982.

All those whose names appear on the first list, but not the second, will be notified that they are subject to a revenue service inquiry about their tax liability. The notices will start going out next spring. An executive of one of the companies objected to the test on the ground that many people who have not done anything wrong would get the notices.

If the test identifies individuals who file no taxes at all, the service will then try to determine whether the same technique can be used to track those who underpay their taxes. According to an I.R.S. plan, the decision whether to use the technique nationwide will not be made until 1985 or later.

A spokesman for the revenue agency said the commercial list it obtained for its test match, after a five-month search, contained the names and addresses of two million households, their estimated incomes, the birthday of the head of each household and the number of people living in each.

In the last few years, the tax agency has become concerned about a slow increase in the number of Americans who fail to pay their taxes. Because of this concern, the agency has sought to develop new techniques for identifying tax evaders.

A recent I.R.S. report on income tax compliance, for example, estimated that revenue losses caused by people compile national mailing lists, the Donnelly Marketing Service of Stamford, Conn., the R.L. Polk Company of Detroit and Metromail of Lincoln, Neb., decided this fall not to sell their information to the tax agency. In separate interviews, officials of the three companies called the project "absolutely ridiculous" and "inappropriate" and indicated it would hurt their business.

The revenue service said in a brokerage firm that provides marketing lists, the Dunhill Company of Washington, D.C., had put together the names the agency sought. Officials at the company did not return several telephone calls, but the revenue service spokesman said the names had been put together from several small

concerns.

Mr. Hoffman, the current head of the 2,600-member Direct Marketing Association, said in a telephone interview that he understood that the tax agency had a legitimate concern and that he and his organization hesitated about making "a big public pronouncement" that might affect the Government's ability to handle a real problem.

"But there are some questions we feel the I.R.S. should consider," he said. "What effect will the I.R.S.'s use of mailing lists have on the public's perception about this kind of communication? What I am worried about is that if the I.R.S. is able to undertake this effort on a national basis, it may make the public afraid to have their name on any mailing list, afraid to buy anything by mail, afraid to fill out coupons. By conservative estimates, direct marketing now accounts for sales totaling $140 billion a year."

DIFFERENCE IS NOTED

Mr. Hoffman said there was a very real difference between the commercial use of a mailing list and the use being explored by the tax agency. "Strangely enough, a mailing list is essentially anonymous," he said. "A company rents a computer tape, prepares one set of labels and makes a mailing. That's it. If you want to have your name removed from a particular list or all lists, our organization operates the Mail Preference Service at East 43d Street in New York where this can be accomplished. "But if the I.R.S. starts with a commercial mailing list, then adds Census data, then cross references it with other data," Mr. Hoffman continuing, "they than are taking something that is esentially anonymous in the commercial world and turning it into individually identifiable information, using it in a way the individual never imagined."

Noting that the company that was said to have sold the list to the tax agency was not a member of the association, Mr. Hoffman said the sale violated one of the provisions of the group's ethical guidelines, that lists should be rented only "to persons who are going to use them for marketing purposes."

The guideline of the trade organization parallels one of the important principles set out in the Federal Privacy Act. The principle is that information collected by an agency for one purpose should not be used for another purpose without informing the individual who provided the information.

CONCERN AMONG POLLSTERS

The Council of American Survey Research Organizations, representing more than 105 public opinion firms, is also concerned about the tax agency's project.

John Rupp, a lawyer for the council in Washington, said, "We think it would be unethical for the I.R.S. or any other entity to use information obtained from individuals under a promise of confidentiality or to use information in a way that is inconsistent with the purpose for which it initially was collected."

Mr. Rupp added that the council would support the Federal project as long as it was completely based on information in public files. But he added: "In a democracy as complex and varied as ours, that polling plays a pivotal role. We worry that survey or marketing research may not long survive if the trust of the American people is undermined.

Because the original sources of the computerized names provided to the revenue service are unknown, it is not possible to determine how the data were collated.

The method used by the Donnelly Marketing Service, however, involves placing in a computer the names and addresses taken from every telephone book as it is published. The computer is then instructed to assign each household to the correct census tract. From the information published by the Census Bureau, conclusions can be made about each household, including median income, average family size and probable race.

In those states where the information is available on a computerized list, Donnelly then matches data from the Department of Motor Vehicles on the model and year of automobiles owned by the individuals at each address. If the auto is an expensive one, the estimated income is adjusted upward; if it is a cheap model, the income is reduced.

Reginald C. Troncone, the executive vice president of Metromail, recently_expressed his concern about the I.R.S. project in a letter to Representative Doug Barnard Jr., the Georgia Democrat who is chairman of the House Government Operations Subcommittee on Commerce, Consumer and Monetary Affairs.

"Our company is caught in the middle," he said. "There isn't any way the I.R.S. can conduct the proposed program and come up with a list of only those individuals who have not filed tax returns. There will be literally millions of legitimate filers who will be contacted by the I.R.S. to provide proof of filing a return.”

[From the New York Times, Mar. 13, 1984]

I.R.S. SEEKS LINKS TO COUNTY COMPUTERS IN TEXAS TO FIND Debtors

(By David Burnham)

WASHINGTON, March 12.-An Internal Revenue Service office in Texas is seeking to establish eletronic links with the computers of 80 counties that will provide it instant access to local records concerning property taxes, voter registration and automobile ownership.