So much for Obama’s pledge to promote greater transparency within the federal government. When President Obama took office, he promised the American people “an unprecedented level of openness in government” and stated, “transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing.” (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/)
Well, that was then. This is now. The Department of Justice has proposed revisions to the Freedom of Information Act (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-03-21/html/2011-6473.htm) which, in part, contain the following language:
“When a component applies an exclusion to exclude records from the requirements of the FOIA pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(c), the component utilizing the exclusion will respond to the request as if the excluded records did not exist. This response should not differ in wording from any other response given by the component.”
I caught a brief mention of this on Fox last evening, but the issue appears to be gaining some steam. These revisions were proposed back in March of this year, but I guess I’ve been living under a rock because I hadn’t read about it. Well, these changes are attracting some scrutiny now and drawing fire from both the left and the right.
Here are a few assorted links to articles discussing the proposed changes in the FOIA:
The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/24/justice-dept-proposes-lying-hiding-existence-of-records-under-new-foia-rule/#ixzz1bpHtbf9Y)
And here is a copy of a letter submitted by the ACLU, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), and OpenThe Government.org to the Department of Justice during the period in which the DOJ solicited public comment on the proposed changes: http://www.openthegovernment.org/sites/default/files/FOIA%20552c%20Comment%20-%2010-19-11%20-%20FINAL.pdf
I realize many forum members may have negative feelings towards some of these organizations based upon their politics, but this seems to be an issue which is worthy of intense scrutiny by every American citizen. The government has always reserved the right to withhold information for a variety of reasons ranging from national security to individual privacy to proprietary business/trade secrets. And the government has also maintained that there were documents that could be exempted from the access granted under the Freedom of Information Act. These exemptions were enacted during Reagan’s presidential tenure by his Attorney General, Edwin Meese (http://www.justice.gov/oip/86agmemo.htm).
So the government can deny access to information or, under certain circumstances, fall back on the “neither confirm nor deny the existence of” strategy with respect to certain documents and information they don’t want made public. The government has plenty of ways to avoid disclosing information they do not want made public.
But these new changes are designed to allow the government to just flat out lie to the public and tell someone seeking access to certain documents that those documents simply don’t exist.
I understand the need for the government to limit access to some information under very specific and closely defined situations, with the provision that there be some review process in place to confirm that the government’s basis for withholding that information is, indeed, valid.
I’m not so keen on the notion of having regulations enacted which allow the government to affirmatively lie to the American public, the courts, basically all comers.
Sure, I know-- “Newsflash… Government Lies to Public!” BFD. I’m not that naive. But to enact laws which make it legal for the government to lie seems a bridge too far.
