Democratic House Moves Bush's Call for Further Restricting Access to Unclassified Info Forward

| | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
In case you had hopes that a Democratic congress would lead a fight against excessive secrecy in government, this may be a useful reality check. In case you savor Orwellian ironies in governmental language the bill's title "The Improving Public Access to Documents Act" is also classic.

Secrecy News reports

Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) and several colleagues last week introduced a bill that endorses and builds upon the recent White House policy statement on "controlled unclassified information" (CUI), which is information that though not classified is subject to restricted access.

Although entitled "The Improving Public Access to Documents Act," it is far from clear that the new bill would serve that purpose. Rather, it would "require the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop and administer policies, procedures, and programs to promote the implementation of the Controlled Unclassified Information Framework."

While well-intentioned, the bill seems premature at best.

From Secrecy News' perspective, it is tactically unwise to lock into statute an executive branch "framework" that still remains largely undefined and that may be subject to significant modification in the course of its projected five-year implementation period. The CUI Office at the National Archives that is supposed to develop the implementing regulations referenced in the bill does not even have its own funding this year, and has also missed the funding cycle for next year.

Among other questionable features (and some positive ones), the bill regrettably endorses the executive branch view of the Freedom of Information Act as the proper channel for public access to agency information on homeland security and related topics.

Thus, the bill says, "The Department [of Homeland Security] should start with the presumption that all homeland security information that is not properly classified, or marked as controlled unclassified information and otherwise exempt from disclosure, should be shared with the public pursuant to section 552 of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the `Freedom of Information Act')."

This is not a "presumption" -- disclosure of non-exempt information pursuant to FOIA is already required by law -- and it would not "improve public access." To the contrary, by presenting disclosure under FOIA as the primary alternative to classification or control, the bill would place an impossible burden on the FOIA process, and would diminish agency responsibility to unilaterally disclose homeland security information that has not been formally requested.


0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Democratic House Moves Bush's Call for Further Restricting Access to Unclassified Info Forward.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://mondoglobo.wftk.org/blog/mt-tb.cgi/287

Leave a comment

Tip line

Do you have a news item that we should know about? Drop us a line at tips@donttasemeblog.com!

About us

Don't Tase Me, Bro! is a production of QuestionAuthority (wiki)

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Phil Leggiere published on June 9, 2008 8:50 PM.

Tyler student, 17, gets 8 years in prison for phone threat | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle was the previous entry in this blog.

Heavily Armed Cops in Commando Uniforms Raid Detroit Art Gallery is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.