DOCSLIB.ORG

Government and Privacy Should Greater Controls Be Imposed on the Gathering and Utilization of Information About U.S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Government and Privacy Should Greater Controls Be Imposed on the Gathering and Utilization of Information About U.S GOVERNMENT AND PRIVACY SHOULD GREATER CONTROLS BE IMPOSED ON THE GATHERING AND UTILIZATION OF INFORMATION ABOUT U.S. CITIZENS BY GOVERNMENT AGENCIES? College Debate Series AMERICANENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH 1150 SEVENTEENTH STREET, N. W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036 THE AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH, established in 1943, is a pub Iicly supported, nonpartisan research and educational organization. AE I studies and sponsors research on public policy issues of national and international significance. Its publications are made available to scholars, public officials, the press, the business community, and the public. The institute does not take positions on policy questions. Opinions expressed are those of the authors. Institute publications take three major forms: 1. LEGISLATIVE AND SPECIAL ANALYSES - balanced analyses of current legislative proposals and special policy issues prepared with the help of specialists from the academic world and the fields of law and government. 2. LONG-RANGE STUDIES - studies in depth of government programs and major national problems, written by independent scholars. 3. RATIONAL DEBATES AND SYMPOSIA - proceedings of debates, seminars, and conferences where eminent authorities with contrasting views discuss controversial issues. ADVISORY BOARD Paul W. McCracken, Chairman* Edmund Ezra Day University Professor of Business Administration University of Michigan Karl Brandt Loy W. Henderson Professor of Economic Policy (Emeritus) Professor of Foreign Relations Stanford University American University R.H. Coase George Lenczowski Professor of Economics Professor of Political Science University of Chicago University of California, Berkeley Milton Friedman Felix Morley Paul S. Russell Distinguished Service Editor and Author Professor of Economics University of Chicago Joseph T. Sneed Dean, School of Law Gottfried Haberler Duke University Resident Scholar American Enterprise Institute for George E. Taylor Public Policy Research Professor of Far Eastern History C. Lowell Harriss and Politics Professor of .Economics Far Eastern & Russian Institute Columbia University University of Washington OFFICERS Chairman Carl N. Jacobs Vice Chairmen Henry T. Bodman H. C. Lumb Herman J. Schmidt President Treasurer William J. Baroody William G. McClintock SENIOR STAFF Thomas F. Johnson Sam S. Crutchfield Anne Brunsdale Director of Research Assistant to the President Director of Publications Joseph G. Butts Waldo H. Dubberstein Morton Blackwell Director of Legislative Analysis Director of International Director of Computer Studies Operations *On leave for governmentservice November 10, 1971 GOVERNMENT AND PRIVACY: SHOULD GREATER CONTROLS BE IMPOSED ON THE GATHERING AND UTILIZATION OF INFORMATION ABOUT U.S. CITIZENS BY GOVERNMENT AGENCIES? College Debate Topic TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE-------------------------------------------------------------- iv CHAPTER !--GOVERNMENT INFORMATION GATHERING AND THE CITIZEN---------- 1 I. Introduction----------------------------------------------- 1 II. The Rationale of Government Information Gathering About Citizens---------------------------------------------- 1 III. Nature and Extent of Government Information About Individuals------------------------------------------- 2 A. Types of Information-------------------------------- 2 B. Extent of the Federal Information System------------ 3 IV. Significant Government Information Systems on Individuals-- 4 V. The Computer and Confidentiality--------------------------- 6 VI. Federal Restrictions on Information Sharing---------------- 6 VII. Information Sharing Among Government Agencies-------------- 7 VIII. Conclusion------------------------------------------------- 9 NOTES TO CHAPTER 1----------------------------------------- 10 CHAPTER 2--DEFINITION OF TERMS--------------------------------------- 13 I. Introduction----------------------------------------------- 13 II. Specific Terms--------------------------------------------- 13 A. "Greater Controls"---------------------------------- 13 B. "The Gathering and Utilization of Information"------ 14 C. "Should"-------------------------------------------- 15 D. "Be Imposed Upon"----------------------------------- 15 E. "United States Citizens"---------------------------- 16 F. "About"--------------------------------------------- 17 G. "By Government Agencies"---------------------------- 1 8 -i- III. Conclusion---------·-----------·------------------------------ 21 NOTES TO CHAPTER 2------------------------------------------ 22 CHAPTER 3--THE DOSSIER AND THE CITIZEN-------------------------------- 24 I. Introduction------------------------------------------------ 24 II. The Threat to Privacy------------------------------------�-- 24 A. Government's Need for Information----------------------- 24 B. The Concept of Privacy---------------------------------- 25 C. Source of the Problem--The Information Systems---------- 26 III. Confidentiality and the Information Systems----------------- 28 IV. The Threat to the Individual-------------------------------- 30 A. Information May Be Improperly Gathered and Used--------- 30 B. Potential Harms----------------------------------------- 32 V. Conclusion-------------------------------------------------- 34 NOTES TO CHAPTER 3------------------------------------------ 35 CHAPTER 4--METHODS OF INFORMATION GATHERING AND SOME QUESTIONS THESE METHODS RAISE--------------------------------------- 37 I. Introduction------------------------------------------------ 37 II. Physical Surveillance--------------------------------------- 37 A. The Legal Background------------------------------------ 37 B. Recent Electronic Eavesdropping Activity---------------- 39 C. Arguments for Further Regulation of Electronic Eaves- dropping------------------------------------------- 40 D. Arguments Against Further Limitations On Eavesdropping Authority------------------------------------------ 41 E. Mail Cover and the Use of Computers to Assist in Surveillance--------------------------------------- 44 III. Other Information Gathering Methods That Raise Questions of Privacy--------------------------------------------- 46 A. P.ersonality. Testing------------------------------------- 47 B. The Polygraph------------------------------------------- 49 IV. Recent Examples of Controversial Investigations By Government--------------------------------------------- SO -ii- A. Congressional Investigations---------------------------- 50 B. Welfare Investigations---------------------------------- 52 c. Security Investigations--------------------------------- 54 v. The Controversy Over Proposals To Make Government Information Gathering More Efficient------------------- 55 VI. The Controversy Over Greater Access To Government-held Information-------------------------------------------- 57 NOTES TO CHAPTER 4------------------------------------------ 59 CHAPTER 5--THE PLAN-------------------------------------------------- 66 I. Introduction------------------------------------------------ 66 II. Administration: A Necessary Evil---------------------------- 66 A. Necessity Thereof--------------------------------------- 66 B. Selection------------------------------------------------67 C. Powers and Criteria--------------------------------------70 D. Judicial Review------------------------------------------71 III. Data Banks---------------------------------------------------73 A. Observations---------------------------------------------73 B. Goals----------------------------------------------------73 C. Plans and Needs------------------------------------------74 D. Disadvantages--------------------------------------------78 E. Conclusion-----------------------------------------------83 IV. Welfare Cases------------------------------------------------83 V. The Jury System and the Courts-------------------------------86 VI. Legalization and Counter Plans-------------------------------87 VII. Conclusion---------------------------------------------------90 NOTES TO CHAPTER 5-------------------------------------------91 Selected Bibliography-------------------------------------------------95 -iii- PREFACE This Special Analysis is concerned exclusively with the issues presented by the 1971-72 intercollegiate debate proposition: "Resolved: That Greater Controls Should Be Imposed On the Gathering and Utilization of Information About United States Citizens By Government Agencies." It is published by the American Enterprise Institute in response to many requests from college debaters for background materials and references on the subject of the debate proposition. It was prepared by Professor John A. Lynch, Director of Debate at St. Anselm's College, Manchester, New Hampshire; and Professor James J. Unger, Director of Debate at George­ town University, Washington, D.C. Both authors come to the project with extensive backgrounds as intercollegiate debaters and debate coaches. The authors wish to stress at the outset that they are not experts in the subject matter of the resolution. They have, however, tried to assemble, organize, and present authoritative material in such a way as to assist debaters seeking to delineate and explore the central issues raised by the national debate proposition. This analysis is not intended to provide a complete review or an end to the debater's research, but is designed rather to serve as a guide to the start of research and a stimulus to its continuation. To this end a bibliography has been included listing many more references than those quoted
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ten Nobel Laureates Say the Bush
    Hundreds of economists across the nation agree. Henry Aaron, The Brookings Institution; Katharine Abraham, University of Maryland; Frank Ackerman, Global Development and Environment Institute; William James Adams, University of Michigan; Earl W. Adams, Allegheny College; Irma Adelman, University of California – Berkeley; Moshe Adler, Fiscal Policy Institute; Behrooz Afraslabi, Allegheny College; Randy Albelda, University of Massachusetts – Boston; Polly R. Allen, University of Connecticut; Gar Alperovitz, University of Maryland; Alice H. Amsden, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Robert M. Anderson, University of California; Ralph Andreano, University of Wisconsin; Laura M. Argys, University of Colorado – Denver; Robert K. Arnold, Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy; David Arsen, Michigan State University; Michael Ash, University of Massachusetts – Amherst; Alice Audie-Figueroa, International Union, UAW; Robert L. Axtell, The Brookings Institution; M.V. Lee Badgett, University of Massachusetts – Amherst; Ron Baiman, University of Illinois – Chicago; Dean Baker, Center for Economic and Policy Research; Drucilla K. Barker, Hollins University; David Barkin, Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana – Unidad Xochimilco; William A. Barnett, University of Kansas and Washington University; Timothy J. Bartik, Upjohn Institute; Bradley W. Bateman, Grinnell College; Francis M. Bator, Harvard University Kennedy School of Government; Sandy Baum, Skidmore College; William J. Baumol, New York University; Randolph T. Beard, Auburn University; Michael Behr; Michael H. Belzer, Wayne State University; Arthur Benavie, University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill; Peter Berg, Michigan State University; Alexandra Bernasek, Colorado State University; Michael A. Bernstein, University of California – San Diego; Jared Bernstein, Economic Policy Institute; Rari Bhandari, University of California – Berkeley; Melissa Binder, University of New Mexico; Peter Birckmayer, SUNY – Empire State College; L.
    [Show full text]
  • The National Data Center Proposal of 1965 and Its Descendants
    Statistical Déjà Vu: The National Data Center Proposal of 1965 and Its Descendants by Rebecca S. Kraus, Ph.D. History Staff U.S. Census Bureau For presentation at the Joint Statistical Meetings Miami Beach, FL, August 1, 2011 This paper is to inform interested parties of ongoing research and to encourage discussion. Any views expressed on historical issues are those of the author and not necessarily those of the U.S. Census Bureau. Abstract Issues concerning sharing of statistical information, linking data sets, and storing and preserving data collected by the federal statistical agencies have long sparked debate. This paper focuses on the National Data Center proposal of 1965, ensuing public concern over its privacy implications, and the response of the Bureau of the Budget and the U.S. Census Bureau. The purpose of this study is to identify the issues leading to the development of the proposal, as well as the consequences of the proposal, in order to inform current policy decisions, particularly in regard to the U.S. Census Bureau. Examples of subsequent efforts at statistical consolidation and data sharing highlight the persistent theme of statistical déjà vu. The author would like to thank the following staff of the U.S. Census Bureau for their review and comment on the contents of this paper: Francis Grailand Hall, Division Chief, Administrative and Customer Services Division (ACSD); Claudette Bennett, Assistant Division Chief, Product Development and Publications Services, ACSD; Bill Maury, Chief, History Staff, ACSD; Nick Birnbaum, History Staff, ACSD; Nancy Gordon, Associate Director for Strategic Planning and Innovation; Mary Frazier, Privacy Office; and Kathleen Styles, formerly of the Policy Office.
    [Show full text]
  • Government 90 (Xx) Human Rights and World Politics
    Prof. Andrew Moravcsik Harvard University Spring 2002 Wednesdays 2:15 – 4:00 PM Government 90cl HUMAN RIGHTS AND WORLD POLITICS This course analyzes international human rights—their philosophical basis, their emergence and legal recognition in the post-World War II world, and their enforcement by unilateral, multilateral, domestic and non-governmental means. We read works by political scientists, policy analysts and legal academics—including a leading international human rights law casebook. The course is designed to assist students in writing a major research paper on the world politics of human rights. The specific questions we shall examine include: What valid basis is there for the assertion of universal rights? Which rights can be so justified and which cannot? Why have governments accepted formal obligations and established international mechanisms to monitor and enforce those obligations, even at considerable sacrifice of domestic sovereignty? In what way have rights been translated into major international legal obligations under the United Nations, regional human rights conventions, and various treaties? Which governments resist this trend and why? What is the relative importance of interstate coercion (intervention, sanctions, financial inducement), institutional design (the nature of international judges and officials, the form of international tribunals and standards), domestic political commitment (the interests of national governments and their constituencies, the role of domestic courts) and idealistic persuasion (the power of NGOs, public opinion, transnational diffusion, and analogical reasoning)? Under what circumstances are international tribunals, military intervention, sanctions, truth commissions, domestic litigation, idealistic persuasion, or public shaming effective means to enforce human rights? What has been the role of groups in civil society—NGOs, political parties, lawyers and judges—in promoting observance of human rights? The reading load totals approximately 150-225 pp.
    [Show full text]
  • No. 29 April 13, 1976
    COUNCIL: April 14 Agenda " Grant Deadlines LETTERS: Librarians Assembly " DEATHS Learning, Revolution and Democracy HUP Services " OPENINGS " THINGS TO DO Volume 22, Number 29April 13, 1976 Published Weekly by the University of Pennsylvania NEWS IN BRIEF FOUR GUGGENHEIM AWARDS Four University of Pennsylvania faculty members have been awarded 1976-77 fellowships by the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation. Selected from among 2.953 applicants in the foundation's 52nd annual competition were: Dr. Henry Hiz, professor of linguistics, who will work on a comparative study of the semantics and syntax of English and Polish: Dr. Bruce Kuklick, associate professor of history, who will study the formation of the American usable past, 1945-63; Dr. Frank H. Warner III, professor of mathematics, who will conduct studies in differential geometry: and Richard Wernick, associate professor of music, who will spend Bicentennial the year on music composition. browsing...page 4 $64 MILLION FOR THE EIGHTIES As of March 31. the University's Program for the Eighties drive COMMENCEMENT: JUSTICE BURGER had gone over the $64-million mark, surpassing 25% of the goal. Warren E. Burger, the Chief Justice of the United States, will The campaign has received its strongest support from alumni, give the Commencement Address and receive an honorary Doctor friends, and bequests, which have contributed about $36.5 million, of Laws degree at the University's 220th Commencement, to be or 27.5% of their goal. Foundations have provided $21 million held at 10 a.m. Friday. May 28. in Convention Hall of the (23.8%) and corporations $6.4 million (19.1%).
    [Show full text]
  • John Harvard Scholarship, 1953–1954, 1954–1955 • Phi Beta Kappa, 1955 • Harvard College Scholarship, 1955–1956
    Ph.D. Economics FRANKLIN M. FISHER Harvard University Jane Berkowitz Carlton and Dennis William Carlton Professor of Microeconomics, Emeritus, Massachusetts Institute of M.A. Economics Technology Harvard University A.B. Economics Harvard University (summa cum laude) Ph.D. Dissertation A Priori Information and Time Series Analysis FELLOWSHIPS, SCHOLARSHIPS, AND PROFESSIONAL HONORS • Detur Prize, 1953 • Social Science Research Council Undergraduate Research Stipend, 1953 • John Harvard Scholarship, 1953–1954, 1954–1955 • Phi Beta Kappa, 1955 • Harvard College Scholarship, 1955–1956 • Rodgers Fellowship, 1956–1957 • Austin Fellowship, 1956–1957 • Junior Fellow of the Society of Fellows, Harvard University, 1957–1959 • Fellow of the Econometric Society, 1963–Present • Irving Fisher Lecturer at Econometric Society Meetings, Amsterdam, September 1968 • Operations Research Society of America Prize for best paper dealing with a military subject published in Operations Research, 1967 • Fellow of American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1969–Present • Council Member of the Econometric Society, 1972–1976 • John Bates Clark Award, American Economic Association, 1973 • F. W. Paish Lecturer, Association of University Teachers of Economics, Sheffield, England, April 1975 • Vice President of the Econometric Society, 1977–1978 • David Kinley Lecturer, University of Illinois, 1978 FRANKLIN M. FISHER Page 2 • President of the Econometric Society, 1979 • Fellowship, John Simon Guggenheim Foundation, 1981–1982 • Erskine Fellow, University of Canterbury, summer
    [Show full text]
  • Second Oral History Interview
    Carl Kaysen Oral History Interview – JFK #2, 7/15/1966 Administrative Information Creator: Carl Kaysen Interviewer: Joseph E. O’Connor Date of Interview: July 15, 1966 Place of Interview: Cambridge, MA Length: 44 pp. Biographical Note Kaysen was a professor at Harvard University (1946-1966); Deputy Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (1961-1963); and director at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton (1966-1976). In this interview Kaysen primarily focuses on the Limited Test Ban Treaty and the Nuclear Test Ban Conference negotiations in Moscow in 1963, among other issues. Access Restrictions No restrictions. Usage Restrictions According to the deed of gift signed May 5, 1992, copyright of these materials has been assigned to the United States Government. Users of these materials are advised to determine the copyright status of any document from which they wish to publish. Copyright The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excesses of “fair use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law.
    [Show full text]
  • 1961–1963 First Supplement
    THE JOHN F. KENNEDY NATIONAL SECURITY FILES USSRUSSR ANDAND EASTERNEASTERN EUROPE:EUROPE: NATIONAL SECURITY FILES, 1961–1963 FIRST SUPPLEMENT A UPA Collection from National Security Files General Editor George C. Herring The John F. Kennedy National Security Files, 1961–1963 USSR and Eastern Europe First Supplement Microfilmed from the Holdings of The John F. Kennedy Library, Boston, Massachusetts Project Coordinator Robert E. Lester Guide compiled by Nicholas P. Cunningham A UPA Collection from 7500 Old Georgetown Road • Bethesda, MD 20814-6126 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The John F. Kennedy national security files, 1961–1963. USSR and Eastern Europe. First supplement [microform] / project coordinator, Robert E. Lester. microfilm reels ; 35 mm. — (National security files) “Microfilmed from the holdings of the John F. Kennedy Library, Boston, Massachusetts.” Accompanied by a printed guide compiled by Nicholas P. Cunningham. ISBN 1-55655-876-7 1. United States—Foreign relations—Soviet Union—Sources. 2. Soviet Union—Foreign relations—United States—Sources. 3. United States—Foreign relations—1961–1963— Sources. 4. National security—United States—History—Sources. 5. Soviet Union— Foreign relations—1953–1975—Sources. 6. Europe, Eastern—Foreign relations—1945– 1989. I. Lester, Robert. II. Cunningham, Nicholas P. III. University Publications of America (Firm) IV. Title. V. Series. E183.8.S65 327.73047'0'09'046—dc22 2005044440 CIP Copyright © 2006 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. ISBN 1-55655-876-7.
    [Show full text]
  • Stan Draenos
    UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY AND THE LIBERAL AWAKENING IN GREECE, 1958-1967 Stan Draenos ABSTRACT: This paper traces the evolution and outcome of the US opening to the Greek Center triggered by the May 1958 parliamentary elections. It focuses on the role which that opening played in the liberal awakening that took shape under the banner of the Center Union (CU) party, founded in September 1961. After John F. Kennedy assumed the US presidency (January 1961), New Frontier liberals, including Andreas Papandreou, son of CU leader George Papandreou, pushed more aggressively for this opening, which was validated by the Center Union’s rise to power in November 1963, the same month as the Kennedy assassination. During the Johnson Administration, US liberal policies in Greece were tested and found wanting, as Cold War fears trumped the US embrace of reform and change in Greece. The American retreat drove US policies towards bankruptcy, culminating in an uneasy acceptance of the 1967 Greek military dictatorship, wreaking permanent damage on Greek–US relations. The US enunciation of the Truman Doctrine on March 12, 1947 was a defining moment for the two countries most directly involved: the United States and Greece. For the US, intervention to defeat the Greek Left in the Civil War (1946-1949) marked the advent of its Cold War rivalry with the Soviet Union. For Greece, it marked the beginning of a deep and complicated dependency relationship with the global super power that had replaced Great Britain as the protector of Western interests in the Eastern Mediterranean.1 As President Dwight D.
    [Show full text]
  • Moral Masculinity: the Culture of Foreign Relations
    MORAL MASCULINITY: THE CULTURE OF FOREIGN RELATIONS DURING THE KENNEDY ADMINISTRATION DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Jennifer Lynn Walton, B.A., M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 2004 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Michael J. Hogan, Adviser ___________________________ Professor Peter L. Hahn Adviser Department of History Professor Kevin Boyle Copyright by Jennifer Lynn Walton 2004 ABSTRACT The Kennedy administration of 1961-1963 was an era marked by increasing tension in U.S.-Soviet relations, culminating in the Cuban missile crisis of October 1962. This period provides a snapshot of the culture and politics of the Cold War. During the early 1960s, broader concerns about gender upheaval coincided with an administration that embraced a unique ideology of masculinity. Policymakers at the top levels of the Kennedy administration, including President John F. Kennedy, operated within a cultural framework best described as moral masculinity. Moral masculinity was the set of values or criteria by which Kennedy and his closest foreign policy advisors defined themselves as white American men. Drawing on these criteria justified their claims to power. The values they embraced included heroism, courage, vigor, responsibility, and maturity. Kennedy’s focus on civic virtue, sacrifice, and public service highlights the “moral” aspect of moral masculinity. To members of the Kennedy administration, these were moral virtues and duties and their moral fitness justified their fitness to serve in public office. Five key elements of moral masculinity played an important role in diplomatic crises during the Kennedy administration.
    [Show full text]
  • The Russian Military: Power and Policy
    The Minimum Means of Reprisal American Academy Studies in Global Security Carl Kaysen, John Steinbruner, and Martin B. Malin, editors Robert Legvold, ed., Thinking Strategically: The Major Powers, Kazahkstan, and the Central Asian Nexus Robert Legvold and Celeste A. Wallander, eds., Swords and Sustenance: The Economics of Security in Belarus and Ukraine Steven E. Miller and Dmitri V. Trenin, eds., The Russian Military: Power and Policy Bruno Coppieters and Robert Legvold, eds., Statehood and Security: Georgia after the Rose Revolution Jeffrey G. Lewis, The Minimum Means of Reprisal: China’s Search for Security in the Nuclear Age The American Academy Studies in Global Security book series is edited at the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and published by The MIT Press. Please direct any inquiries about the series to: American Academy of Arts and Sciences 136 Irving Street Cambridge, MA 02138-1996 Telephone: (617) 576-5000 Fax: (617) 576-5050 email: [email protected] Visit our website at www.amacad.org The Minimum Means of Reprisal China’s Search for Security in the Nuclear Age Jeffrey G. Lewis American Academy of Arts and Sciences Cambridge, Massachusetts The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England © 2007 by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 136 Irving Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-1996 All Rights Reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher. This book was set in ITC Galliard by Anne Read. Printed and bound in the United States of America.
    [Show full text]
  • Mcgeorge Bundy, Oral History Interview – JFK#1, 3/1964 Administrative Information
    McGeorge Bundy, Oral History Interview – JFK#1, 3/1964 Administrative Information Creator: McGeorge Bundy Interviewer: Richard Neustadt Date of Interview: March 1964, May 1964 Length: 192 pages Biographical Note Bundy was Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (1961-1966). In this interview, he discusses John F. Kennedy’s thinking and decision making style; his relationship with other members of his administration, including his close working relationship with Theodore C. Sorensen; the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs invasion; the Cuban Missile Crisis; Laos and the Vietnam War; the threat of military conflict with the Soviet Union over Berlin; and JFK’s relationship with other heads of state, among other issues. Access Open. Usage Restrictions Copyright of these materials have passed to the United States Government upon the death of the interviewee. Users of these materials are advised to determine the copyright status of any document from which they wish to publish. Copyright The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excesses of “fair use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law.
    [Show full text]
  • 1984 Commencement Program, University Archives, University Of
    UNIVERSITY of PENNSYLVANIA Two Hundred and Twenty-Eighth Commencement for the Conferring of Degrees PHILADELPHIA CIVIC CENTER CONVENTION HALL Monday, May 21, 1984 9:45 A.M. Guests will find this diagram helpful in locating the Contents on the opposite page under Degrees in approximate seating of the degree candidates. The Course. Reference to the paragraph on page seven seating roughly corresponds to the order by school describing the colors of the candidates hoods ac- in which the candidates for degrees are presented, cording to their fields of study may further assist beginning at top left with the College of Arts and guests in placing the locations of the various Sciences. The actual sequence is shown in the schools. Contents Page Seating Diagram of the Graduating Students 2 The Commencement Ceremony 4 Commencement Notes 6 Degrees in Course . 8 The College of Arts and Sciences 8 The College of General Studies 16 The School of Engineering and Applied Science 18 The Wharton School 26 The Wharton Evening School 30 The Wharton Graduate Division 31 The School of Nursing 36 The School of Medicine 38 The Law School 39 The Graduate School of Fine Arts 41 The School of Dental Medicine 44 The School of Veterinary Medicine 45 The Graduate School of Education 46 The School of Social Work 47 The Annenberg School of Communications 48 The Graduate Faculties 49 Certificates 54 General Honors Program 54 Dental Hygiene 54 Advanced Dental Education 54 Social Work 55 Education 55 Fine Arts 55 Commissions 56 Army 56 Navy 56 Principal Undergraduate Academic Honor Societies 57 Faculty Honors 60 Prizes and Awards 63 Class of 1934 69 Events Following Commencement 70 The Commencement Marshals 72 Academic Honors Insert The Commencement Ceremony MUSIC Valley Forge Military Academy and Junior College Regimental Band DALE G.
    [Show full text]