The Rock River Times | March 18-24, 2015 |
15
A Fourth Estate for you
Right to know
National
Public notices should stay in the sun
Congress, president must Take closed gov’t personally endorse FOIA reform
By Jim Zachary Editor, Valdosta (Ga.) Daily Times Director, Transparency Project of Georgia
A
s we recognize Sunshine Week, the public’s right to know is under assault throughout the United States. State lawmakers are whittling away at Sunshine Laws in multiple ways, not the least of which is the effort to remove requirements to publish public notices in the place where communities are most likely to find important information they want and need to know — in the local newspaper. Efforts to allow local governments the option of placing required public notices on government websites, or on third party sites that bury the information is poor, ill-advised legislation that should be viewed as a threat to and further erosion of government transparency. The reason public notices are required for publication in newspapers is to make them available to as wide an audience as possible. Keeping public notices public is critical. Public notices alert the general public about bankruptcy proceedings, adoptions, foreclosures, public hearings, tax liens, local legislative proposals, zoning changes and proposed tax increases — all things the public wants and needs to know. Burying that information on a government website would be an assault on taxpayers, and all residents. Public notices should not be hidden in a dark corner. They should be kept out in the sunshine where they can be easily seen. Government cannot be its own watchdog. Newspapers have a long, important legacy of helping the public keep an eye on local government through news reporting and the publication of government notices. Newspapers also serve as a historical record that will be looked upon by researchers now and years in the future. Much of that record is documented by public notices. Simply placing required public notices on government owned or controlled websites would mean a person would have to know exactly what they’re searching for — or what keywords to use — in order to find the specific information they want to access. The government website model effectively hides the actions of government. Making public notices available online is important and almost all newspapers also place the notices on local websites and statewide sites through press associations that aggregate the data. Lawmakers should stop assaulting the principles of government transparency and work, instead, to protect the public’s right to know.
By Sean Vitka
Federal Policy Manager, Sunlight Foundation
W
hile Sunshine Week is about transparency writ large, there’s arguably no single bigger piece of that foundational American value than the Freedom of Information Act. FOIA uncovered details of the torture that occurred at Guantanamo Bay, and led us to J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI file on John Lennon, among many, many other cases about government secrecy. But we need an updated FOIA that fits 21st century information needs. Passing the FOIA Improvement Act, one of the few truly bipartisan bills during President Barack Obama’s tenure, is the first step to reform. The Obama administration has stated that it hopes transparency will be a defining characteristic of the president’s time in office, but at the same time, it has been working to unravel key tenets of FOIA. For example, why is the CIA still fighting to withhold information about the Bay of Pigs? Why has the administration increased use of discretionary authority to withhold information, while claiming to be the most transparent in history? According to The Associated Press, “five years after Obama directed agencies to less frequently invoke a ‘deliberative process’ exemption to withhold materials describing decision-making behind the scenes, the government did it anyway, a record 81,752 times.” These examples do not illustrate a true commitment to transparency. It’s time for the president to speak out and publicly support the FOIA Improvement Act. It would empower Americans to better hold government accountable by giving them access to information sooner rather than later, codifying a presumption of openness and closing the loopholes on exemptions. And it’s time for his administration to follow suit. FOIA, signed into law in 1966 by President Lyndon Johnson, is the kind of policy Americans should be proud of. Over five decades it has evolved to ensure people can hold the government accountable and force it to be transparent. But it’s always been a source of conflict between the public, seeking information, and the government, often working to keep itself away from public oversight. Administrations, including Johnson’s, have always been reluctant to give the people any windows into their insular world. According to Bill Moyers, who was Johnson’s press secretary when FOIA became law, the president, “hated the very idea of the Freedom of Information Act; hated the thought of journalists rummaging in
government closets; hated them challenging the official view of reality. He dug in his heels and even threatened to pocket veto the bill after it reached the White House.” Despite this, Johnson publicly said he signed it “with a deep sense of pride that the United States is an open society in which the people’s right to know is cherished and guarded.” Similarly, Watergate underscored the utter inadequacy of the public’s ability to hold the executive branch accountable – after all, government accountability, transparency and the public record should never be dependent on the courage of a whistleblower. But that didn’t stop President Gerald Ford, under guidance from now-Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, future-Vice President Dick Cheney and once-and-future Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld from vetoing reform. Congress overrode Ford’s move and secured for America one of the most critical components of FOIA – the right to judicial review. In both the current and previous Congress, FOIA’s vanguard is composed of senior membership in both parties, specifically Senators John Cornyn and Patrick Leahy and Representatives Darrell Issa and Elijah Cummings. Both the Senate and the House reintroduced their bills in February, which, in congressional terms, might as well be the speed of light. Their collaboration here isn’t just good for FOIA – it’s a salve for some of the wounds inflicted by the so-called do-nothing 113th Congress. On the other hand, perhaps it’s unsurprising that certain actors within the Obama administration oppose reform. Indeed, they managed to stall it to death last year over specious claims that it would, for unspecified reasons, (1) make certain administrative law enforcement actions more difficult and/or (2) pose a threat to information given to the government by the financial sector (there are exemptions to FOIA requests that cover both of these already). The same quiet opposition is showing up again now. Although this is all certainly less dramatic than Johnson’s secret view of FOIA, and less aggressive than Ford’s post-Watergate veto, Obama’s silence is more ironic. There may be no more important political move yet unmade than Obama’s endorsement of strong FOIA reform. So far, the president remains silent, while his agencies fight against it. Sean Vitka is the federal policy manager at the Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan nonprofit that advocates for open government globally and uses technology to make government more accountable to all.
By Brian J. Hunhoff
Yankton County (S.D.) Observer
D
on’t take it personally? That’s usually good advice, but today we urge the opposite reaction to all government bodies operating in the shadows, purposely avoiding public scrutiny and genuine transparency. In other words, take closed government personally. Please! Take it personally when a reporter is kicked out of a city council meeting so members can hold an illegal or unnecessary executive session. Take it personally when public access to government records is refused, limited, or attached to excessive fees. Take it personally when a judge jails a reporter for refusing to reveal a confidential source. Take it personally when government fails to limit political contributions, and ignores ties of mutual benefit between private business and elected officials. Take it personally when a governor issues secretive pardons. Take it personally when a presidential administration works vigorously to identify and criminally prosecute government whistle-blowers. Take all of this personally because it directly affects the quality and scope of government information you get from the press. Wouldn’t it be great if more people understood a reporter’s exclusion from a meeting also excludes them, the general public, from learning details that are being hidden? Wouldn’t it be great if everyone embraced the notion that government openness is an essential pillar of democracy? Wouldn’t it be great if more people remembered the press serves as their eyes and ears in the halls of government? Wouldn’t it be great if more people became aware that jailing journalists not only intimidates the press, but also chills the public’s right to know? Wouldn’t it be great to see thousands of citizens press Congress to pass a federal shield law protecting reporters from being locked up for doing their job? Wouldn’t that be great? Brian Hunhoff is the opinion writer for the Yankton County Observer. Hunhoff is a two-time winner of the Golden Quill award for editorial writing from the International Society of Weekly Newspaper Editors.
First Amendment Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.