An interesting statement from the Skipjack proponents is that its use will be voluntary, and there's nothing that the citizen using it will be required to divulge (he doesn't even know the key and they do), and therefore no one's rights are being violated. Assume for the moment that that will remain true. They just want to encourage voluntary compliance. This is an interesting point. How much encouragement counts as coercion? Is it okay if they tax a dollar from a million people and offer the million to you for your information? Is it okay if they make it illegal to sell non-compromised phones (i.e., you don't have to use Skipjack, you can go unencrypted or roll your own)? These people are purposely, avowedly, trying to "encourage" us to do something they have no legal right to require. Why is that okay? Other than asking us as "good citizens" to do something, how is slanting the incentives okay? Do we have the right not to be nudged? -fnerd quote me