about us Return to the home page

Blogs 11 - 30 of 213

Previous 10 Blogs 5 at a time | 10 at a time | 20 at a time Next 20 Blogs

Lawsuit: Disclose Agencies That Bypass Clearance Process

The White House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) generally requires other federal agencies to run budgetary materials, proposed legislation, reports and even testimony by it before the agencies submit those materials to Congress. Public Citizen is trying to discover the full list of agencies that can bypass this requirement. Check out the story here.

Posted 07-17-2008 12:43 PM EDT

............................................................

Congress Attempts to Cut the White House Secrecy Habit

Good for Congress: The U.S. House of Representatives last week passed a bill requiring the National Archives to issue stronger standards for preserving administration e-mails and to "aggressively inspect" whether an administration is complying with those standards, according to a July 13 New York Times editorial.

Bad for the public: The Bush administration is threatening a veto. This is the same administration that has allowed key e-mails to go missing - including ones from the lead-up to the Iraq war and relating to the destruction of CIA interrogation videotapes.

"We fear we may never find out all that has gone missing in this administration, although we urge [c]ongressional investigators to keep trying," the Times said. "What we do know is that the Bush gaps of missing e-mails run into hundreds of thousands during some of the most sensitive political moments."

Posted 07-14-2008 12:05 PM EDT

............................................................

White House Censors Government Official

Last year, a staffer in Vice President Dick Cheney’s office censored the testimony of a high-ranking government official who wrote about the health consequences of global warming, a former Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official said on July 9.

According to The Washington Post, an unnamed Cheney staffer ordered six pages to be edited out of testimony from Julie L. Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), according to a letter from former EPA deputy associate administrator Jason K. Burnett to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.).

The White House’s Council on Environmental Quality had asked that Burnett work with the CDC to delete information about the “human health consequences of climate change,” he wrote.

“For years, we’ve suspected that Cheney was the puppeteer for administration policy on global warming,” said Frank O’Donnell, head of the advocacy group Clean Air Watch, in the Post. “This kiss-and-tell account appears to confirm the worst.”

 

 

 

Posted 07-14-2008 9:57 AM EDT

............................................................

Administration Invokes Executive Privilege

In what is really no surprise, the Bush administration has invoked executive privilege in documents requested by a U.S. House of Representatives committee, according to The Washington Post.

The documents in question: Papers about the White House’s communication with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson’s decision to overrule agency officials who favored granting California and other states permission to mandate a vehicle emissions reduction.

According to lawmakers, administration officials would not respond to subpoenas for these documents.

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, ended up calling off his threat of a contempt of Congress vote against Johnson and another official while Democrats figure out how exactly they should respond, according to the Post.

And an EPA official said the agency had handed over most of the documents requested - withholding fewer than 25 of more than 10,000.

Handing over a “vast majority” of the documents doesn’t mean much if the documents that are withheld contain key information. It’s still secrecy.

Posted 07-14-2008 9:52 AM EDT

............................................................

New security policy may slow FOIA process even more

Is President Bush's new security policy shrinking or expanding secrecy in government?


Last month Bush announced that a uniform governmental document classification system had finally been created.


The new system, called “controlled unclassified information,” will be used by all governmental agencies in the U.S., including state and local ones. The purpose of the system is to facilitate communications among all levels of government. As Bush put it, the goal of CUI is “to standardize practices and thereby improve the sharing of information, not to classify or declassify new or additional information."

However, some articles that have been available to the public for years have recently been reclassified. Also, critics of the new policy think that it will make governmental documents harder for the public to see than ever before. On its Secrecy News blog page, the Federation of American Scientists states that it fears that Freedom of Information Act requests could be denied for documents that have not yet been specifically approved for public viewing.


Bush has given the National Archives five years to fully implement the system. A new document classification system was proposed by the Sept. 11 commission in 2004, as a result of its findings that better communication between the FBI and CIA might have helped the agencies prevent the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.


“The best ally we have in protecting ourselves against terrorism is an informed public,” said Thomas H. Kean, co-chairman of the Sept. 11 commission. Though the new policy may make communications easier among departments, it may prove to be just another obstacle in the quest for open government.

Posted 06-23-2008 1:16 PM EDT

............................................................

Judge Upholds Secrecy Claim

The White House does not have to release to the public records related to millions of missing e-mails, a federal judge ruled June 16.

According to The Washington Post, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly said the White House’s Office of Administration (OA) is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act.

The ruling was made in a lawsuit filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). CREW said it is appealing the decision, according to the Post.

The ruling means that the White House can continue to keep the extent of its e-mail problems under wraps.

“We are disappointed in the ruling and believe the judge reached the wrong legal conclusion,” CREW executive director Melanie Sloan said in a statement, as quoted by the Post. “The Bush administration is using the legal system to prevent the American people from discovering the truth about the millions of missing White House e-mails. The fact is, until CREW asked for documents pertaining to this problem, the Office of Administration routinely processed FOIA requests. Only because the administration has so much to hide here, has the White House taken the unprecedented position that OA is not subject to the FOIA.”

Posted 06-16-2008 4:40 PM EDT

............................................................

Taking the White House to Task

A June 4 New York Times editorial  excoriates the Bush administration for playing politics with climate change, hiding and manipulating scientific information about global warming.

Last week, NASA's inspector general found that the agency's political appointees in the public affairs office attempted to restrict reporter access to James Hansen, NASA's leading climate scientist - who had criticized the administration's refusal to address climate change, according to the Times

“The administration long ago secured a special place in history for bending science to its political ends,” the editorial says. “One costly result is that this nation has lost seven years in a struggle in which time is not on anyone's side.”

Posted 06-04-2008 12:43 PM EDT

............................................................

It’s Time to Make Rove Talk

Karl Rove - former political mastermind in the Bush White House - has been known to work behind the scenes.

But it looks like his time in the spotlight - on Capitol Hill, before the House Judiciary Committee - is finally approaching.

The New York Times editorialized June 2  that the committee, which has subpoenaed Rove to testify, “should do everything in its power to see that he [testifies] and that he answers all of its questions.”

This comes after the editorial notes that, during an appearance on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” Rove did not “directly” deny his involvement in the Justice Department’s decision to prosecute former Democratic Alabama Gov. Donald Siegelman, who was convicted on corruption charges and sentenced to more than seven years. According to The Times, Siegelman had been the Democrats’ best shot of retrieving Alabama’s governorship - until his indictment.

Was the U.S. justice system manipulated to bring about a politically motivated outcome? It’s up to the House Judiciary Committee to find out.

It’s finally time for the behind-the-scenes guy to step forward.

Posted 06-02-2008 1:06 PM EDT

............................................................

What Will It Take ...

To make Karl Rove appear before the House Judiciary Committee? Rove, Bush’s former chief political adviser, already has refused the committee’s invitation to appear voluntarily.

Now, according to The New York Times, he’s been served a subpoena from the committee. But his lawyer, Robert D. Luskin, said Rove was not going to appear because the White House told him not to. (Remember, Rove is no longer working for the White House.)

Committee Democrats want Rove to appear before them so they can ask questions about the controversial decisions to dismiss several federal prosecutors and to prosecute former Democratic Alabama Gov. Donald E. Siegelman.

And if Rove refuses to testify? House Democrats are going to have to consider issuing a contempt citation, the Times said.

Posted 06-02-2008 12:48 PM EDT

............................................................

The Bush administration’s double top-secret trade deal

From Joe Newman at CitizenVox.org:

So, journalist and blogger Ed Brayton was a little curious after the U.S. government struck a deal with the European Union and other countries that compensates them in exchange for the U.S. passing online gambling laws that interfere with international trade as governed by the World Trade Organization. Brayton, who also happens to be an online poker player, was curious what exactly the U.S. was giving up in exchange. You should be too, since it is rumored that the compensation could be worth billions of dollars. The only problem is that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative refused to release details of the compensation agreement to Brayton, claiming it was a matter of national security. I’m not sure whether they did this with a straight face. Public Citizen filed suit this week on behalf of Brayton. The suit contends the Bush administration is illegally withholding the details of the compensation deal.

Brayton has written about the government’s ludicrous contention on his blog, Dispatches from the Culture Wars:

"Yes, they are actually claiming that this document, which has nothing even remotely do to with anything that could conceivably, in Dick Cheney’s wildest imagination, have anything to do with national security, has been properly classified. Americans, according to this administration, have no right to know how many billions of our tax dollars they’ve spent with no legislative authorization whatsoever in order to buy the cooperation of other nations and allow them to continue to violate the rights of American adults by preventing them from gambling in the privacy of their own home."

And here’s what Public Citizen attorney Bonnie I. Robin-Vergeer said about the secret deal:

"Americans have a right to know what kinds of trade concessions the U.S. government is granting other countries, especially when those deals have a significant impact on domestic policy and may be worth billions of dollars. The Bush administration’s decision to withhold the agreement under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) has more to do with its desire to prevent public and congressional scrutiny of the settlement before it is enshrined in a new WTO schedule than it does with national security. FOIA requires the agreement’s release."

You can read the complaint here.

Posted 05-21-2008 11:09 AM EDT

............................................................

Promises, Promises

Despite its promises, the Republican National Committee (RNC) no longer will try to restore missing e-mails sent by White House officials on RNC accounts, according to Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, during a Feb. 26 hearing.

White House officials - including former presidential adviser Karl Rove - had used RNC accounts for government business, even though rules stated that they had to use official channels to conduct government business, according to the Feb. 27 Washington Post. (Administration officials have acknowledged such practices.)

The RNC had told the committee previously that it was trying to restore e-mails from 2001 to 2003, when the RNC’s policy was to purge all e-mails after 30 days.

Somehow, the RNC had a change of heart.

“The result is a potentially enormous gap in the historical record,” Waxman said, including the prelude to the Iraq war.

Posted 02-27-2008 12:44 PM EDT

............................................................

Army Restricts Access to Unclassified Information

The Army has closed public access to a digital library that contains unclassified field and technical information, according to The Washington Post.

On Feb. 6, the Reimer Digital Library was moved behind a firewall, protected by a password.

The Army says it is limiting access to comply with Defense Department policies for tightening the security of military Web sites and to keep better track of who is accessing these sites.

However, the Project on Government Secrecy, a program within the nonprofit Federation of American Scientists, is hoping to restore access to the documents. The group filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on Feb. 13 for all of the unclassified, publicly releasable documents in the library’s collection so it can post the material on the group’s Web site.

“They can configure Army Web sites however they like,” the Project on Government Secrecy's director, Steven Aftergood, is quoted in the Post as saying. “What they cannot do is to withhold information from the public that is subject to release under the FOIA. … What we really want to do is to persuade them to adopt a reasonable policy of openness, not to provide an alternative - unless we have to.”

Posted 02-21-2008 12:49 PM EDT

............................................................

Public Health Agency Suppresses Hazardous Substances Report

Same story, different cast: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is blocking the release of a report that studies environmental hazards in the eight Great Lakes states.

The study, originally set for release last July, warns that more than nine million people living in more than two dozen “areas of concern” - including those living in Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland and Milwaukee - could face increased health risks from exposure to contaminants such as pesticides, lead, mercury or other pollutants, according to The Center for Public Integrity.

The government has said the report’s quality was below expectations and was still being reviewed. (Dozens of experts have reviewed drafts of the report since 2004.) And the individual who oversaw the study has been demoted after pushing to release the Great Lakes study and other reports.

“It’s not good because it’s inconvenient,” said Canadian biologist Michael Gilbertson, a Canadian biologist who was a peer reviewer for the report. “The whole problem with all this kind of work is wrapped up in that word ‘injury.’ If you have injury, that implies liability. Liability, of course, implies damages, legal processes, and costs of remedial action. The governments, frankly, in both countries are so heavily aligned with, particularly, the chemical industry, that the worst amongst the bureaucracies is that they really do not want any evidence of effect or injury to be allowed out there.”

Posted 02-18-2008 1:17 PM EDT

............................................................

House Issues Contempt Citations Against White House Aides

On Feb. 14, the House of Representatives approved contempt citations against White House aides for refusing to cooperate with an inquiry into allegations that political motives were behind the firing of U.S. attorneys in 2006.

The citations were issued against White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers. Bolten’s contempt resolution notes that he has refused to turn over subpoenaed documents and e-mails sought by the House Judiciary Committee in the investigation, according to The Washington Post.

Miers is cited because she refused to testify after she was subpoenaed to come before the committee last summer.

For almost a year, Bush has not allowed any current or former member of his West Wing staff to testify in the investigation. Bush, citing executive privilege, has offered to allow staffers to testify only if the testimony is taken without transcripts and under oath.

“This is beyond arrogance. This is hubris taken to the ultimate degree,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

Posted 02-18-2008 1:14 PM EDT

............................................................

Three's a charm

Three’s a charm, unless you’re the Internal Revenue Service, that is. The agency is flouting three court orders requiring it to provide a nationally recognized researcher with statistical data on how the agency enforces the nation’s tax laws.

On Feb. 11, Public Citizen, along with the Seattle, Wash. law firm Davis Wright Tremaine filed a lawsuit on behalf of the researcher, Susan B. Long and her organization, the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC).

Posted 02-15-2008 5:36 PM EDT

............................................................

Senators Introduce Bill for Oversight of State Secrets Privilege

It’s no surprise that the Bush administration wants to invoke the state secrets privilege in court when it can. Plainly speaking, this White House loves its secrets.

But a couple of influential senators are trying to provide some oversight for the use of the state secrets privilege, which allows the government to prevent sensitive national security information from being publicly disclosed as evidence in court.

Sens. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) introduced on Jan. 22 the State Secrets Protection Act (S. 2533). The bill would require courts in civil lawsuits to look at the evidence for which the administration is trying to use the privilege and assess whether the administration’s assertions are valid, according to a statement from Kennedy. Currently, there is no law giving courts guidelines for the use of the states secret privilege in civil cases.

“When federal courts accept the executive branch’s state secrets claims as absolute, our system of checks and balances breaks down,” Kennedy said in his statement. “By refusing to consider key pieces of evidence, or by dismissing lawsuits outright without considering any evidence at all, courts give the executive branch the ability to violate American laws and constitutional rights without any accountability or oversight, and innocent victims are left unable to obtain justice.”

Posted 01-30-2008 6:25 PM EDT

............................................................

White House E-mails Go Missing

Missing: 473 days’ worth of White House e-mails.

Yes, for hundreds of days between 2003 and 2005, the White House has no archives of e-mail messages for one or more of its offices, according to the summary of an internal White House study released by House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) that was covered in The Washington Post.

Early in the Bush administration, the White House threw out the custom archiving system the Clinton administration had adopted under a federal court order, according to the Post. Instead, the Bush administration has been using an inadequate e-mail archiving system.

According to the Post, no presidential office e-mails were archived on Dec. 17, 20 or 21 in 2003, which was the week after Saddam Hussein’s capture. And no e-mails were archived in the vice president’s office for four days in early October 2003 - dates that match up with the beginning of the Justice Department probe into the leak of a CIA officer’s identity, according to a summary of the White House study.

Of course, the White House is disputing the credibility of its own study. White House spokesman Tony Fratto said there was no evidence that e-mails are missing.

Guess the White House study doesn’t count as evidence …  

Posted 01-22-2008 5:46 PM EDT

............................................................

Bush Secrecy Efforts Crumbling

At long last, the pillars of the administration’s secrecy are beginning to crumble somewhat.

According to a Jan. 13 Washington Post story:

On Jan. 8, a federal magistrate ordered the administration to reveal whether it had backup copies of missing White House e-mails;

  • In December, a federal judge ruled that presidential visitor lists - which Bush had kept secret - are public records;
  • On Dec. 31, Bush signed a bill speeding the release of documents requested under the Freedom of Information Act;
  • In October, the Directorate of National Intelligence released the $43.5 billion intelligence budget - the disclosure of which was required under a bill passed by Congress in early 2007.

“The administration has brought these challenges on itself,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the top Republican on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. She favored disclosing the intelligence budget. “By trying to keep secret information that doesn’t need to be secret, it invites skepticism of all of its secrecy claims.”

The Post story does note that the administration has been victorious in its quest for secrecy. For instance, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court rejected in December a request by the American Civil Liberties Union to release documents on the warrantless wiretapping program.

Such losses are terrible and contribute to the atmosphere of secrecy. But the victories - which are increasing in number - are encouraging.

Posted 01-22-2008 5:32 PM EDT

............................................................

Senior Bush Lawyers Discussed CIA Videotapes

Top White House lawyers were involved in discussions with the CIA about whether to destroy videotapes showing secret interrogations of two Al Qaeda operatives, according to a Dec. 19 New York Times story.

Unnamed officials are saying these lawyers were involved in the discussions to a much greater degree than the administration had said. Those who took part, according to the officials, included Alberto R. Gonzales (White House counsel until early 2005), David S. Addington (former counsel to Vice President Dick Cheney and now his chief of staff), John B. Bellinger III (senior lawyer at the National Security Council until January 2005) and Harriet E. Miers (successor to Gonzales as White House counsel).

And while previous reports said some administration officials advised against destroying the tapes, which occurred in November 2005, the Times story notes some conflicting recollections of what actually happened.

“One former senior intelligence official with direct knowledge of the matter said there was ‘vigorous sentiment’ to destroy the tapes among some top White House officials,” according to the newspaper.

But other officials said no one at the White House wanted to destroy the tapes. “Those officials acknowledged, however, that no White House lawyer gave a direct order to preserve the tapes of advised that destroying them would be illegal,” according to the Times.

The plot thickens …

Posted 12-19-2007 11:53 AM EDT

............................................................

Congress Passes Bill to Strengthen Freedom of Information Act

Finally, government transparency wins a battle!

On Dec. 18, Congress gave its OK to a bill that would speed up the sometimes years-long process of obtaining public documents under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The law already says that agencies must respond within 20 days of a FOIA request. But in reality, the process can drag out for months, or even years. This bill would require public tracking numbers to be assigned to requests. And if an agency exceeds the 20-day deadline, the agency could not charge FOIA requesters for research or copying costs, according to The Washington Post.

“In an era of increased government secrecy, we cannot postpone reforming the very act that keeps our government open to the people whose government this is,” said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.). “FOIA helps make government accountable and responsive to the people.”

If you’re keeping score, today it’s Transparency: 1. Secrecy: 0.

 

Posted 12-19-2007 11:51 AM EDT

Previous 10 Blogs 5 at a time | 10 at a time | 20 at a time Next 20 Blogs


home | secrecy blog | about us | join us | other secrecy sites
Powered by Public Citizen - www.citizen.org
Copyright © 2016 Public Citizen. All rights reserved.