Date: 3 May 2005 07:11:43 -0000
Message-ID: <20050503071143.82747.qmail@cr.yp.to>
Automatic-Legal-Notices: See http://cr.yp.to/mailcopyright.html.
From: "D. J. Bernstein" <djb@math.uic.edu>
To: "Maddox, Nathan" <NMaddox@ILSOS.NET>
Cc: "Paine, Renee" <Rpaine@ILSOS.NET>
Subject: Re: replacement for statement of economic interests
References: <96DF6DA6D4E9A946B7D02E762CED515801016CAA@exc01.ilsos.net>

I must admit to some puzzlement at your introductory paragraph.

Your office is blatantly violating the privacy rights and due-process
rights of several hundred tenured professors at the University of
Illinois. But you're not giving this issue as much attention as you
could.

You have, in particular, been ignoring some simple questions. Instead of
answering them, you've been telling me ``the same thing over and over
again.'' I haven't been asking you to repeat yourself; I've been asking
for information that you _haven't_ provided.

For example, on 18 April, you referred to my ``right to challenge'' your
office's actions ``in appropriate administrative or judicial
proceedings.'' I asked the following question in response:

   Are there actually any mechanisms for administrative review?

That's a simple yes-no question. As far as I can tell, the answer is no;
your comment about ``administrative ... proceedings'' was a mistake. But
you _still_ haven't answered the question.

I'm presuming (following the usual ``Never attribute to malice what can
be adequately explained by stupidity'' maxim) that this failure has been
caused by your general lack of attention, and not by some weird attempt
to hide an administrative-review mechanism from me. But I have to waste
time dealing with the possibility that this presumption is incorrect. I
have no idea why you haven't simply answered the question.

Similarly, I asked two questions regarding the ``official noncompliance
list'' sent to the Attorney General---how the statement works, and who
receives it. Ms. Price failed to include the relevant form in the packet
that she sent me. You answered the second question but ignored the
first.

Exactly what information is included in that statement?

As for your office's notification to ``the employee's agency'': Thank
you for pointing out this extra punishment mechanism. I see the relevant
notification form in Ms. Price's packet. Who at UIC do you send these
letters to? When you say that ``further disciplinary action is up to the
agency,'' are you saying that termination of employment is the agency's
responsibility, or that the agency is permitted to impose other
penalties? Finally, aside from

   (1) sending me letters demanding checks for $15, $115, etc.,
   (2) including my name in this statement to UIC, and
   (3) including my name in the statement to the Attorney General,

will your office take any further action regarding my refusal to file a
Statement of Economic Interests?

---D. J. Bernstein, Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics,
Statistics, and Computer Science, University of Illinois at Chicago