Promoting Transparency in Government Print E-mail

 

The Problem

            Since September 11th, massive amounts of government information—documents, databases, reports, etc.—have been removed from agency websites, and unknown quantities of information that would have once been publicly disseminated are kept out of the public’s view and reach and disseminated only on a “legitimate” need to know” basis.[1]  Administration officials issued memoranda placed off-limits information that agencies previously had discretion to release though the Freedom of Information Act, and authorized new, unrestrained forms of secrecy. 

This has resulted in at least six categories of problems which are discussed below:

      I.             Information Removed from Government Websites and “Need to Know” Culture Reduce Public Trust and Security

     II.            Sensitive But Unclassified/Controlled Unclassified Information Markings Reduce Security by Impeding Disclosure to State, Local and Tribal Authorities, First Responders and to the Public

     III.          FOIA – National Security Used to Justify Overuse of Exemptions and Limit Public Access

     IV.            Presidential Records – Executive Order Limits Disclosure; Records Policy Puts National Security History at Risk

     V.            Secret Intelligence Budget Impedes Oversight

     VI.           Preemption of State and Local Open Government Laws Promotes Secrecy

Guiding Principles

Our democratic form of government is based on an informed public. Our laws provide structures to guarantee the public's right to know what its government is doing and keep it accountable.  Over the last eight years, public access to information has been framed as a blueprint for terrorism and, as a result, keeping information secret has become the default position throughout much of the federal government.  By restoring openness in our federal government, the next president and the next Congress will be doing the right thing for our country and something the public overwhelmingly wants. The public does not now trust its government. The new president and Congress will have to work to restore that trust.[2]   
           
We agree that certain information needs to be protected from general disclosure, at least for a period of time during which it might be considered critical. The dramatic loss in the availability of information in the wake of the tragedy of September 11th, however, created the false appearance of tension between openness and security. Secrecy does not make for a more secure society.  Such restrictions actually reduce security by, in part, preventing the public from learning what we need to know to protect ourselves and our communities and to keep our country safe and secure.  Secrecy thus sometimes results in a more vulnerable society and always results in a less accountable government. The next Administration needs to lift restrictions on public access to government information in order to promote the sharing of information that is needed to inform the public of what measures are truly necessary to protect against threats to public safety.

Recommended Documents for Further Review

1.      “Secrecy Report Card: Indicators of Secrecy in the Federal Government” (published by OpenTheGovernment.org) (2008).

2.      Banisar, Government Secrecy: Decisions Without Democracy”(2007) http://www.openthegovernment.org/otg/govtsecrecy.pdf.

3.      Keefe, “Reinventing Transparent Government” (published by the Century Foundation) (2008) http://www.tcf.org/Publications/HomelandSecurity/Patrick%20Agenda.pdf.

4.      Testimony of John D. Podesta, President and CEO, Center for American Progress Action Fund, Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution United States Senate on Secrecy and the Rule of Law (September 16, 2008) http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=3550&wit_id=7418

5.      Statement of Meredith Fuchs, General Counsel, National Security Archive, To the Constitution Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee on “Restoring the Rule of Law” (September 16, 2008) http://feingold.senate.gov/ruleoflaw/testimony/nationalsecurityarchive.pdf

6.      Statement of Patrice McDermott to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution for the Hearing, “Restoring the Rule of Law” (September 16, 2008) http://feingold.senate.gov/ruleoflaw/testimony/open.pdf.

7.      Statement of Peter M. Shane, Jacob E. Davis and Jacob E. Davis II Chair in Law Ohio State University Moritz College of Law, to the Constitution Subcommittee of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary on Restoring the Rule of Law (September 16, 2008) http://feingold.senate.gov/ruleoflaw/testimony/shane.pdf

I.          Information Removed from Government Websites and “Need to Know” Culture Reduce Public Trust and Security

A.     The Problem

            After the attacks on September 11, 2001, vast amounts of information were removed from public accessibility on government Web sites. Any information that could conceivably relate to a terrorism or homeland security topic was scrubbed. There was no way to tally what was removed and no way to learn what criteria agencies used for the removal of information or the guidance under which they have been operating since that time.
            Over the last eight years, the executive branch has been transformed into a government that withholds information unless members of the public demonstrate a “legitimate” need to know.  This is not only a dangerous mindset in an open society, but it stands in the way of a safer and more secure homeland.

B.     Proposed Measures

1.      The President should direct the executive branch to operate under the presumption that government information should be made available to the public except under limited and clearly-articulated statutory or regulatory exceptions. [3]

2.      The president should direct the review of standards and guidelines created and implemented post-September 11th regarding information made publicly-available online.[4]

C.     Allies*

American Association of Law Libraries
            Mary Alice Baish, Acting Washington Affairs Representative
           
baish (at) law.georgetown.edu
            202-662-9200

American Association of University Professors
           
John W. Curtis, Ph.D., Director of Research and Public Policy
            
jcurtis (at) aaup.org
            202-737-5900 (ext. 143)

American Library Association
            Lynne E. Bradley, Director
           
lbradley (at) alawash.org
            202-682-8410
            The ALA Policy Manual: The Rights of Library Users and the USA Patriot Act (52.4.5)
           
available at
           
http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/governance/policymanual/policymanual.31_3.pdf

Association of Research Libraries
            Prudence Adler
           
prue (at) arl.org
            202-296-2296 (ext. 104)

Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC)
            Chip Pitts, President
           
chip.pitts (at) att.net

Center for Democracy & Technology 
            Gregory T. Nojeim
           
gnojeim (at) cdt.org
            202-637-9800 (ext 113)
            The Internet in Transition, available at
http://www.cdt.org/election2008/

Common Cause
           
Sarah Dufendach, Vice President for Legislative Affairs
           
www.commoncause.org
            202-736-5709

Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
           
Corey Saylor, National Legislative Director
           
csaylor (at) cair.com
            202-384-8857 (c)
            202-488-8787 (w)

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
            Anne Weismann, Chief Counsel
           
aweismann (at) citizensforethics.org
            202-408-5565
            Without a Trace,
available at 
           
http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/041207WithoutATraceFullReport.pdf 
            Record Chaos, available at
http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/FINAL%20REPORT.pdf

Defending Dissent Foundation
            Sue Udry, Director
           
Sue.udry (at) defendingdissent.org
            202-549-4225
           
www.defendingdissent.org

Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
           
Marcia Hofman
           
marcia (at) eff.org
            415-436-9333 (ext. 116)
            A Transparency Agenda for the New Administration, available at 
           
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/11/transparency-agenda

Essential Information
            John Richard or Robert Weissman
            202-387-8034

Federation of American Scientists
            Steve Aftergood
           
saftergood (at) fas.org
            202-546-3300

Government Accountability Project
            Jesselyn Radack, Homeland Security Director
           
JesselynR (at) whistleblower.org
            202-408-0034 (ext. 107)

Liberty Coalition
           
Michael D. Ostrolenk, Co-Founder/National Director
           
www.libertycoalition.net
            mostrolenk (at) libertycoalition.net
            301-717-0599

National Coalition Against Censorship
           
Joan E. Bertin, Esq., Executive Director
           
bertin (at) ncac.org
            212-807-6222
            Fax: 212-807-6245

National Litigation Project of the Lowenstein International Human Rights Clinic, Yale Law School
           
Hope Metcalf 
           
hope.metcalf (at) yale.edu

            Ramzi Kassem  
           
ramzi.kassem (at) yale.edu
            203-432-4800

National Security Archive
            Meredith Fuchs, General Counsel
           
mfuchs (at) gwu.edu
            202-994-7000

Northern California Association of Law Libraries
            Kelly Browne, President

OMB Watch
           
Sean Moulton, Director, Federal Information Policy
            202-234-8494
            Fax: 202- 234-8584

OpenTheGovernment.org
            Patrice McDermott
           
pmcdermott (at) openthegovernment.org
            202-332-6736

Public Citizen
           
Angela Canterbury, Director of Advocacy, Public Citizen's Congress Watch Division
           
acanterbury (at) citizen.org
            202-454-5188
            Fax: 202-546-5562
            
           
Chad Scherr, Privacy Advocate
           
chad.scherr (at) gmail.com
            917-428-6005

South Asian Americans Leading Together
            Priya Murthy
           
priya (at) saalt.org
            301-270-1855

Stanford Law School  -  Mills International Human Rights Clinic
           
Barbara J. Olshansky, Leah Kaplan Visiting Professor and Clinic Director
            Kathleen Kelly, Clinical Teaching Fellow
           
bj.olshansky (at) gmail.com 
            650-736-2312

U.S. Bill of  Rights Foundation
           
Dane vonBreichenruchardt, President
           
usbor (at) aol.com
            202-546-7079

*          These groups and individuals support the general principles expressed and the general policy thrust and judgments in the policy proposals described above.  The allies listed do not necessarily endorse the specific language in every proposed solution, but they do agree that the proposals reflect the general principles that should govern policy in this area.  Please contact the individuals and organizations listed in this section for more information.

D.    Counter-Arguments, and Rebuttal

1.      The disclosure of information removed would create a “road map” for terrorists.

The public has a right to information that is not properly classified or properly withheld under a FOIA Exemption. Agencies, sometimes under White House direction, acted out of fear and bureaucratic risk-aversion in the aftermath of Sept. 11th. This is not what the laws[5] and policies[6] of the government direct. It is not likely that with White House leadership there would be significant executive branch opposition. No congressional opposition known.

E.     Recommended Documents for Further Review

1.      National Security Archive et al, Proposed Executive Memorandum on Freedom of Information Act Policy. (2008) (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/foiatrans/FOIA_Transition_Recommendation.pdf )

2.      McDermott, “Open the Government, A New Information Policy,” in Mandate for Change: Policies and Leadership for 2009 and Beyond, Lexington Press, (forthcoming January 2009).

3.      Moving Toward a 21st Century Right-to-Know Agenda - Recommendations to President-Elect Obama and Congress. http://www.openthegovernment.org/otg/21stRightToKnow-Final.pdf  (Signatories are as of 7 November 2008)

II.        Sensitive But Unclassified/Controlled Unclassified Information Markings Reduce Security by Impeding Disclosure to State, Local and Tribal Authorities, First Responders and to the Public

A.     The Problem

            On March 19, 2002, the Bush Administration resurrected a concept from the 1980s, “sensitive but unclassified” information, and, through joint Memoranda from White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and the Department of Justice, directed agencies to review government information regarding weapons of mass destruction, as well as other information “that could be misused to harm the security of our nation or threaten public safety.”[7] 
            Although the Administration’s rhetoric was about proper handling and particular sensitivity of information, the result has been that agencies have placed more than 107 unique markings on “sensitive but unclassified” information, eighty-one percent of which are based not on statute or approved regulations, but are the product of department and agency policies.[8]  Further, there are more than 131 different labeling or handling processes and procedures. Agencies have also treated these markings as de facto exemptions from public disclosure (both under FOIA and also affirmative disclosure of information that the public needs for its safety and security). Overall, the widespread use of labels to control information deemed sensitive but unclassified has impeded interagency and inter-governmental information-sharing and has threatened the public’s ability to have access to government information it needs to ensure public safety.
            On May 9, 2008, the president issued a Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies on the Sharing of Controlled Unclassified Information[9] that establishes a framework to standardize control markings and handling procedures across the “information sharing environment.”  Although the memorandum ostensibly seeks to enact standards across agencies for the designation of information as CUI, it does nothing to decrease the use of these markings.  In fact, the memo allows agency’s to continue to make control determinations as a matter of department policy, outside of the usual public notice and comment system. The memo also indicates that a CUI label may be a criterion for release decisions; this policy risks undermining the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and disclosure of information to Congress. Further, under the President’s proposed framework, control designations could easily be treated as simply another level of classification, further reducing the public’s access to critical information.

B.     Proposed Measures

1.      The president should amend or replace the CUI Memorandum with a memorandum that directs agencies to reduce use of information control markings, prohibits reliance on a control marking as a basis for withholding information requested by the public, and includes a positive statement recognizing that information-sharing and transparency improve security and making clear that the CUI Framework’s uniform system is intended to increase disclosure wherever possible.[10]

2.      The new administration should also ensure that the implementation of any framework includes measures to reduce unnecessary control labels, such as a system of audits, training, discipline, and internal and public challenges.[11]

C.     Allies*

American Association of Law Libraries
            Mary Alice Baish, Acting Washington Affairs Representative
           
baish (at) law.georgetown.edu
            202-662-9200

American Association of University Professors
           
John W. Curtis, Ph.D., Director of Research and Public Policy
           
jcurtis (at) aaup.org
            202-737-5900 (ext. 143)

American Library Association
            Lynne E. Bradley, Director
           
lbradley (at) alawash.org
            202-682-8410
            The ALA Policy Manual: The Rights of Library Users and the USA Patriot Act (52.4.5)
            available at 
           
http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/governance/policymanual/policymanual.31_3.pdf

Association of Research Libraries
            Prudence Adler
           
prue (at) arl.org
            202-296-2296 (ext. 104)

Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC)
            Chip Pitts, President
           
chip.pitts (at) att.net

Center for Democracy & Technology 
            Gregory T. Nojeim
           
gnojeim (at) cdt.org
            202-637-9800 (ext 113)
            The Internet in Transition, available at
http://www.cdt.org/election2008/

Common Cause
           
Sarah Dufendach, Vice President for Legislative Affairs
            202-736-5709
           
www.commoncause.org

Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
           
Corey Saylor, National Legislative Director
           
csaylor (at) cair.com
            202-384-8857 (c)
            202-488-8787 (w)

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
            Anne Weismann, Chief Counsel
            
aweismann (at) citizensforethics.org
            202-408-5565
            Without a Trace,
available at
            
http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/041207WithoutATraceFullReport.pdf
            Record
Chaos, available at http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/FINAL%20REPORT.pdf

Defending Dissent Foundation
            Sue Udry, Director
           
Sue.udry (at) defendingdissent.org
            202-549-4225
           
www.defendingdissent.org

Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
           
Marcia Hofman
           
marcia (at) eff.org
            415-436-9333 (ext. 116)
            A Transparency Agenda for the New Administration,
available at
           
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/11/transparency-agenda

Essential Information
            John Richard or Robert Weissman
            202-387-8034

Federation of American Scientists
            Steve Aftergood
           
saftergood (at) fas.org
            202-546-3300

Government Accountability Project
            Jesselyn Radack, Homeland Security Director
           
JesselynR (at) whistleblower.org
            202-408-0034 (ext. 107)

Liberty Coalition
           
Michael D. Ostrolenk, Co-Founder/National Director
           
www.libertycoalition.net
            mostrolenk (at) libertycoalition.net
            301-717-0599

National Coalition Against Censorship
           
Joan E. Bertin, Esq., Executive Director
           
bertin (at) ncac.org
            212-807-6222
            Fax: 212-807-6245

National Litigation Project of the Lowenstein International Human Rights Clinic, Yale Law School
           
Hope Metcalf 
           
hope.metcalf (at) yale.edu
            
           
Ramzi Kassem  
           
ramzi.kassem (at) yale.edu
            203-432-4800

National Security Archive
            Meredith Fuchs, General Counsel
           
mfuchs (at) gwu.edu
            202-994-7000

Northern California Association of Law Libraries
            Kelly Browne, President

OMB Watch
           
Sean Moulton, Director, Federal Information Policy
            202-234-8494
            Fax: 202- 234-8584

OpenTheGovernment.org
            Patrice McDermott
           
pmcdermott (at) openthegovernment.org
            202-332-6736

Public Citizen
           
Angela Canterbury, Director of Advocacy, Public Citizen's Congress Watch Division
           
acanterbury (at) citizen.org
            202-454-5188
            Fax: 202-546-5562

Chad Scherr, Privacy Advocate
           
chad.scherr (at) gmail.com
            917-428-6005

South Asian Americans Leading Together
            Priya Murthy
           
priya (at) saalt.org
            301-270-1855

Stanford Law School  -  Mills International Human Rights Clinic
           
Barbara J. Olshansky, Leah Kaplan Visiting Professor and Clinic Director
            Kathleen Kelly, Clinical Teaching Fellow
           
bj.olshansky (at) gmail.com 
            650-736-2312

U.S. Bill of  Rights Foundation
           
Dane vonBreichenruchardt, President
           
usbor (at) aol.com
            202-546-7079

*        These groups and individuals support the general principles expressed and the general policy thrust and judgments in the policy proposals described above.  The allies listed do not necessarily endorse the specific language in every proposed solution, but they do agree that the proposals reflect the general principles that should govern policy in this area.  Please contact the individuals and organizations listed in this section for more information.

D.    Counter-Arguments, and Rebuttal

            The problem of sharing information about vulnerabilities, threats and risks across governments and with some affected industries is real. Officials in DHS, intelligence community, some in business communities and in state and local governments argue that these control markings make that sharing possible without resorting to classification and the problems with getting clearances. It took a very long time for the White House Memo to be finalized, apparently because of opposition in some agencies to instituting control. It is not clear who congressional opposition might be.
           
The widespread use of labels to control information deemed sensitive but unclassified has impeded interagency and inter-governmental information-sharing and has threatened the public’s ability to have access to government information it needs to ensure public safety. Any new framework has to rein in the creation of these control markings or the problem will persist and worsen. Reps. Thompson, Harman passed legislation in the House codifying the WH Framework with modifications to promote more openness. Senators Lieberman and Collins introduced legislation to codify the Framework government-wide, with some of the modifications in the Harman bill.  Rep. Waxman passed legislation in the House that takes a government-wide approach of limiting and controlling the use of control markings.

E.     Recommended Documents for Further Review

1.      “Secrecy Report Card: Indicators of Secrecy in the Federal Government” (published by OpenTheGovernment.org) (2008).

2.      House Report 110-810, “Reducing Information Control Designations Act,” (H.R. 6576; Committee on Oversight and Government Reform) (July 30, 2008) http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_reports&docid=f:hr810.110.pdf.

3.      House Report 110-779, “Improving Public Access to Documents Act of 2008,” (H.R. 6193; Committee on Homeland Security) (July 28, 2008) http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_reports&docid=f:hr779.110.pdf

III.       FOIA – National Security Used to Justify Overuse of Exemptions and Limit Public Access

A.     The Problem

            In the wake of September 11, 2001, the government issued memoranda that are often regarded as having reversed the presumption of disclosure embodied in FOIA.  First, on October 12, 2001, Attorney General Ashcroft issued a memo emphasizing FOIA’s exemptions and stating that the Department of Justice would defend agency withholdings of records unless they lacked a sound legal basis in law.[12]  The Ashcroft memo replaced a memo by Janet Reno that had emphasized discretionary disclosure and required agencies to identify the specific harm that would result from disclosure before withholding documents.[13]
            Five months later, Memoranda issued by White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and the Department of Justice directed agencies[14] to review government information regarding weapons of mass destruction, as well as other information “that could be misused to harm the security of our nation or threaten public safety.” Agencies were told that they should “process any Freedom of Information Act request for records containing such information in accordance with the Attorney General's FOIA Memorandum of October 12, 2001, by giving full and careful consideration to all applicable FOIA exemptions.”
            Due to the very broad mandate in the Card-Department of Justice Memoranda, the years since the issuance of the Ashcroft and Card Memoranda have seen a decrease in the government’s reliance on FOIA Exemption 1, the exemption relating specifically to national security, and a staggering increase in the use of many of FOIA’s other exemptions.  In some of these cases, agencies have tried to shoehorn national-security-related arguments into exemptions that were not designed to protect national security by claiming that records were exempt because their release would harm national security—even though the records could not properly be classified and withheld under Exemption One. Overall, the memoranda, issued at a time of great fear for national security, contributed to a culture of secrecy that has led to the withholding of many records unrelated to national security concerns.
            In particular, according to a study of 25 agencies conducted by the Coalition of Journalists for Open Government[15], reliance on Exemptions 6 and 7(c), FOIA’s personal privacy exemptions, increased 148% and 176% respectively between 1998 and 2007; reliance on Exemption 5, which includes records covered by the deliberative process privilege, and which was specifically referenced in the Ashcroft memo, increased 95%; and reliance on Exemption 2, which applies to records related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency, and which was specifically mentioned in the Card memo, increased 389%. 

B.     Proposed Measures

1.      The new President should order the Attorney General to issue a memorandum to heads of departments and agencies rescinding the Ashcroft memorandum and reaffirming FOIA’s presumption of disclosure and the Department of Justice’s commitment to government transparency. 

2.      The new memorandum should set forth the agency’s policy that records should be released unless there is both a legal basis to withhold them and the withholding agency reasonably foresees that disclosure would harm an interest protected by the applicable exemption.[16]   

C.     Allies*

American Association of Law Libraries
            Mary Alice Baish, Acting Washington Affairs Representative
           
baish (at) law.georgetown.edu
            202-662-9200

American Association of University Professors
            John W. Curtis, Ph.D., Director of Research and Public Policy
           
jcurtis (at) aaup.org
            202-737-5900 (ext. 143)

American Library Association
            Lynne E. Bradley, Director
           
lbradley (at) alawash.org
            202-682-8410
            The ALA Policy Manual: The Rights of Library Users and the USA Patriot Act (52.4.5) 
           
available at
           
http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/governance/policymanual/policymanual.31_3.pdf

Association of Research Libraries
            Prudence Adler
           
prue (at) arl.org
            202-296-2296 (ext. 104)

Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC)
            Chip Pitts, President
           
chip.pitts (at) att.net

Center for Democracy & Technology 
            Gregory T. Nojeim
           
gnojeim (at) cdt.org
            202-637-9800 (ext 113)
            The Internet in Transition, available at
http://www.cdt.org/election2008/

Common Cause
            Sarah Dufendach, Vice President for Legislative Affairs
            202-736-5709
           
www.commoncause.org

The Constitution Project
            Sharon Bradford Franklin
           
sfranklin (at) constitutionproject.org
            202-580-6920

Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
            Corey Saylor, National Legislative Director
           
csaylor (at) cair.com
            202-384-8857 (c)
            202-488-8787 (w)

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
            Anne Weismann, Chief Counsel
            
aweismann (at) citizensforethics.org
            202-408-5565
            Without a Trace,
available at
            
http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/041207WithoutATraceFullReport.pdf
            Record
Chaos, available at http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/FINAL%20REPORT.pdf

Defending Dissent Foundation
            Sue Udry, Director
           
Sue.udry (at) defendingdissent.org
            202-549-4225
           
www.defendingdissent.org

Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
            Marcia Hofman
           
marcia (at) eff.org
            415-436-9333 (ext. 116)
            A Transparency Agenda for the New Administration,
available at
            
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/11/transparency-agenda

Essential Information
            John Richard or Robert Weissman
            202-387-8034

Federation of American Scientists
            Steve Aftergood
           
saftergood (at) fas.org
            202-546-3300

Government Accountability Project
            Jesselyn Radack, Homeland Security Director
           
JesselynR (at) whistleblower.org
            202-408-0034 (ext. 107)

Liberty Coalition
            Michael D. Ostrolenk, Co-Founder/National Director
           
www.libertycoalition.net
            mostrolenk (at) libertycoalition.net
            301-717-0599

National Coalition Against Censorship
            Joan E. Bertin, Esq., Executive Director
           
bertin (at) ncac.org
            212-807-6222
            Fax: 212-807-6245

National Litigation Project of the Lowenstein International Human Rights Clinic, Yale Law School
            Hope Metcalf 
           
hope.metcalf (at) yale.edu

Ramzi Kassem  
           
ramzi.kassem (at) yale.edu
            203-432-4800

National Security Archive
            Meredith Fuchs, General Counsel
           
mfuchs (at) gwu.edu
            202-994-7000

Northern California Association of Law Libraries
            Kelly Browne, President

OMB Watch
            Sean Moulton, Director, Federal Information Policy
            202-234-8494
            Fax: 202- 234-8584

OpenTheGovernment.org
            Patrice McDermott
           
pmcdermott (at) openthegovernment.org
            202-332-6736

Public Citizen
            Angela Canterbury, Director of Advocacy, Public Citizen's Congress Watch Division
           
acanterbury (at) citizen.org
            202-454-5188
            Fax: 202-546-5562

Chad Scherr, Privacy Advocate
           
chad.scherr (at) gmail.com
            917-428-6005

South Asian Americans Leading Together
            Priya Murthy
            
priya (at) saalt.org
            301-270-1855

Stanford Law School  -  Mills International Human Rights Clinic
            Barbara J. Olshansky, Leah Kaplan Visiting Professor and Clinic Director
            Kathleen Kelly, Clinical Teaching Fellow
           
bj.olshansky (at) gmail.com 
            650-736-2312

U.S. Bill of  Rights Foundation
            Dane vonBreichenruchardt, President
           
usbor (at) aol.com
            202-546-7079

*         These groups and individuals support the general principles expressed and the general policy thrust and judgments in the policy proposals described above.  The allies listed do not necessarily endorse the specific language in every proposed solution, but they do agree that the proposals reflect the general principles that should govern policy in this area.  Please contact the individuals and organizations listed in this section for more information.

D.    Counter-Arguments, and Rebuttal

Not likely that with White House leadership there would be executive branch opposition. No known organizational opposition. No congressional opposition known to this being done by a new administration, although there was strong resistance in 110th, when the Republicans controlled the Congress, to revoking the Ashcroft Memo.

E.     Recommended Documents for Further Review

1.      “When Exemptions Become the Rule” (published by the Coalition of Journalists for an Open Government) (2005), available at (http://www.cjog.net/documents/Exemptions_Study.pdf )

IV.       Presidential Records – Executive Order Limits Disclosure; Records Policy Puts National Security History at Risk

A.     The Problem

            Presidential records are the most crucial records for documenting the nation's national security decision-making.  For instance, in most of the controversial debates regarding recent national security policies, including warrantless domestic surveillance, rendition and detention policies, interrogation policies, the records at the center of the decision-making are presidential in nature or are being shielded as presidential.  Thus, it is critical that presidential records be subject to preservation and disclosure requirements.  The Bush Administration has flouted existing requirements by destroying records -- including e-mail during the critical period when the President decided to go to war against Iraq -- and has used an executive order to override congressional efforts to ensure that an accounting of those presidential decisions will eventually be released.  
            According to a  September 2008 GAO report,[17] the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) has indicated a risk that it will not have the capability to process the Bush administration’s presidential records at the time of the January 2009 presidential transition and has not yet developed a plan to mitigate this significant risk. NARA’s proposed schedule for developing a plan will leave it little time to prepare for and implement the plan, “decreasing the assurance that it will be adequately prepared to meet the requirements of the Congress, the incoming President, and the courts for information contained in the previous administration’s records.”

B.     Proposed Measures  

1.      The new administration should, immediately following the elections, commit to working with the National Archives and Records Administration and Congress to ensure the necessary oversight and resources for the transfer of the Bush presidential records. 

2.      The new administration should revoke Executive Order 13233, which created new privileges and led to excessive delay in the processing of presidential records for release to the public.[18]

3.      The new administration should support legislation to mandate preservation of presidential records in order to ensure that the most critical records of the American role in the world are not forever lost.[19]

C.     Allies*

American Association of Law Libraries
            Mary Alice Baish, Acting Washington Affairs Representative
           
baish (at) law.georgetown.edu
            202-662-9200

American Association of University Professors
            John W. Curtis, Ph.D., Director of Research and Public Policy
           
jcurtis (at) aaup.org
            202-737-5900 (ext. 143)

American Library Association
            Lynne E. Bradley, Director
           
lbradley (at) alawash.org
            202-682-8410
            The ALA Policy Manual: The Rights of Library Users and the USA Patriot Act (52.4.5)
            
available at
            
http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/governance/policymanual/policymanual.31_3.pdf

Association of Research Libraries
            Prudence Adler
           
prue (at) arl.org
            202-296-2296 (ext. 104)

Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC)
            Chip Pitts, President
           
chip.pitts (at) att.net

Center for Democracy & Technology 
            Gregory T. Nojeim
           
gnojeim (at) cdt.org
            202-637-9800 (ext 113)
            The Internet in Transition, available at
http://www.cdt.org/election2008/

Common Cause
            Sarah Dufendach, Vice President for Legislative Affairs
            202-736-5709
           
www.commoncause.org

Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
            Corey Saylor, National Legislative Director
           
csaylor (at) cair.com
            202-384-8857 (c)
            202-488-8787 (w)

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
            Anne Weismann, Chief Counsel
           
aweismann (at) citizensforethics.org
            202-408-5565
            Without a Trace, available at 
           
http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/041207WithoutATraceFullReport.pdf
            Record
Chaos, available at http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/FINAL%20REPORT.pdf

Defending Dissent Foundation
            Sue Udry, Director
           
Sue.udry (at) defendingdissent.org
            202-549-4225
           
www.defendingdissent.org

Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
            Marcia Hofman
           
marcia (at) eff.org
            415-436-9333 (ext. 116)
            A Transparency Agenda for the New Administration,
available at
           
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/11/transparency-agenda

Essential Information
            John Richard or Robert Weissman
            202-387-8034

Federation of American Scientists
            Steve Aftergood
           
saftergood (at) fas.org
            202-546-3300

Government Accountability Project
            Jesselyn Radack, Homeland Security Director
           
JesselynR (at) whistleblower.org
            202-408-0034 (ext. 107)

Liberty Coalition
            Michael D. Ostrolenk, Co-Founder/National Director
           
www.libertycoalition.net
            mostrolenk (at) libertycoalition.net
            301-717-0599

National Coalition Against Censorship
            Joan E. Bertin, Esq., Executive Director
           
bertin (at) ncac.org
            212-807-6222           
            Fax: 212-807-6245

National Litigation Project of the Lowenstein International Human Rights Clinic, Yale Law School
            Hope Metcalf
           
hope.metcalf (at) yale.edu

Ramzi Kassem  
           
ramzi.kassem (at) yale.edu
            203-432-4800

National Security Archive
            Meredith Fuchs, General Counsel
           
mfuchs (at) gwu.edu
            202-994-7000

Northern California Association of Law Libraries
            Kelly Browne, President

OMB Watch
            Sean Moulton, Director, Federal Information Policy
            202-234-8494
            Fax: 202- 234-8584

OpenTheGovernment.org
            Patrice McDermott
           
pmcdermott (at) openthegovernment.org
            202-332-6736

Public Citizen
            Angela Canterbury, Director of Advocacy, Public Citizen's Congress Watch Division
           
acanterbury (at) citizen.org
            202-454-5188
            Fax: 202-546-5562

Chad Scherr, Privacy Advocate
           
chad.scherr (at) gmail.com
            917-428-6005

South Asian Americans Leading Together
            Priya Murthy
           
priya (at) saalt.org
            301-270-1855

Stanford Law School  -  Mills International Human Rights Clinic
            Barbara J. Olshansky, Leah Kaplan Visiting Professor and Clinic Director
            Kathleen Kelly, Clinical Teaching Fellow
           
bj.olshansky (at) gmail.com 
            650-736-2312

U.S. Bill of  Rights Foundation
            Dane vonBreichenruchardt, President
           
usbor (at) aol.com
            202-546-7079

*          These groups and individuals support the general principles expressed and the general policy thrust and judgments in the policy proposals described above.  The allies listed do not necessarily endorse the specific language in every proposed solution, but they do agree that the proposals reflect the general principles that should govern policy in this area.  Please contact the individuals and organizations listed in this section for more information.

D.    Counter-Arguments and Rebuttal

            Conservative scholars (like the Heritage Foundation) oppose broad legislation, especially reversing an E.O., because they see it as a violation of the separation of powers.[20]
            A p
resident working with Congress can overcome separation-of-powers issues. A president can revoke an E.O. with no separation-of-powers issues concerns arising. PRA legislation was introduced in 110th.

E.     Recommended Documents for Further Review

1.      National Security Archive et al, Proposed Executive Order and Memorandum on Presidential Records Act and Presidential Records Policy.

2.      House Report 110-44, “Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2007,” (H.R. 1255; Committee on Oversight and Government Reform) (March 9, 2007) (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_reports&docid=f:hr044.110.pdf)

V.        Secret Intelligence Budget Impedes Oversight

A.     The Problem

            Tens of billions of dollars are allocated for intelligence each year, yet for most of the past half century the size of the intelligence budget has been treated as classified information and withheld from public disclosure.  This extreme form of secrecy has impeded legitimate public oversight of intelligence, and may even have damaged the intelligence community itself by concealing the diversion of authorized intelligence funds into other non-intelligence programs.
            The 9/11 Commission concluded that it was time to end this practice and recommended that “the overall amounts of money being appropriated for national intelligence and to its component agencies should no longer be kept secret.”[21]  By act of Congress, disclosure of the total budget for the National Intelligence Program was mandated in 2007 and 2008.  No adverse effects on national security have followed the disclosure of the intelligence budget.  Accordingly, it should be continued into the future.

B.     Proposed Measures

1.      The annual disclosure of the intelligence budget total should cease to be an exception and should become the new norm.

2.      In order to promote an orderly budget process, the intelligence budgets of the component agencies should also be disclosed, as recommended by the 9/11 Commission.

C.     Allies*

American Association of Law Libraries
            Mary Alice Baish, Acting Washington Affairs Representative
           
baish (at) law.georgetown.edu
            202-662-9200

American Association of University Professors
            John W. Curtis, Ph.D., Director of Research and Public Policy
           
jcurtis (at) aaup.org
            202-737-5900 (ext. 143)

American Library Association
 
          Lynne E. Bradley, Director
           
lbradley (at) alawash.org
            202-682-8410
            The ALA Policy Manual: The Rights of Library Users and the USA Patriot Act (52.4.5) 
           
available at
            
http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/governance/policymanual/policymanual.31_3.pdf

Association of Research Libraries
            Prudence Adler
           
prue (at) arl.org
            202-296-2296 (ext. 104)

Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC)
            Chip Pitts, President
           
chip.pitts (at) att.net

Center for Democracy & Technology 
            Gregory T. Nojeim
           
gnojeim (at) cdt.org
            202-637-9800 (ext 113)
            The Internet in Transition, available at
http://www.cdt.org/election2008/

Common Cause
            Sarah Dufendach, Vice President for Legislative Affairs
            202-736-5709
           
www.commoncause.org

Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
            Corey Saylor, National Legislative Director
           
csaylor (at) cair.com
            202-384-8857 (c)
            202-488-8787 (w)

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
            Anne Weismann, Chief Counsel
           
aweismann (at) citizensforethics.org
            202-408-5565
            Without a Trace, available at 
           
http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/041207WithoutATraceFullReport.pdf
            Record
Chaos, available at http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/FINAL%20REPORT.pdf

Defending Dissent Foundation
            Sue Udry, Director
           
Sue.udry (at) defendingdissent.org
            202-549-4225
           
www.defendingdissent.org

Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
            Marcia Hofman
           
marcia (at) eff.org
            415-436-9333 (ext. 116)
            A Transparency Agenda for the New Administration,
available at
            
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/11/transparency-agenda

Essential Information
            John Richard or Robert Weissman
            202-387-8034

Federation of American Scientists
            Steve Aftergood
           
saftergood (at) fas.org
            202-546-3300

Government Accountability Project
            Jesselyn Radack, Homeland Security Director
           
JesselynR (at) whistleblower.org
            202-408-0034 (ext. 107)

Liberty Coalition
            Michael D. Ostrolenk, Co-Founder/National Director
           
www.libertycoalition.net
            mostrolenk (at) libertycoalition.net
            301-717-0599

National Coalition Against Censorship
            Joan E. Bertin, Esq., Executive Director
           
bertin (at) ncac.org
            212-807-6222
            Fax: 212-807-6245

National Litigation Project of the Lowenstein International Human Rights Clinic, Yale Law School
            Hope Metcalf 
           
hope.metcalf (at) yale.edu

Ramzi Kassem  
           
ramzi.kassem (at) yale.edu
            203-432-4800

National Security Archive
            Meredith Fuchs, General Counsel
            
mfuchs (at) gwu.edu
            202-994-7000

Northern California Association of Law Libraries
            Kelly Browne, President

OMB Watch
            Sean Moulton, Director, Federal Information Policy
            202-234-8494
            Fax: 202- 234-8584

OpenTheGovernment.org
            Patrice McDermott
           
pmcdermott (at) openthegovernment.org
            202-332-6736

Public Citizen
            Angela Canterbury, Director of Advocacy, Public Citizen's Congress Watch Division
           
acanterbury (at) citizen.org
            202-454-5188
            Fax: 202-546-5562

Chad Scherr, Privacy Advocate
           
chad.scherr (at) gmail.com
            917-428-6005

South Asian Americans Leading Together
            Priya Murthy
           
priya (at) saalt.org
            301-270-1855

Stanford Law School  -  Mills International Human Rights Clinic
            Barbara J. Olshansky, Leah Kaplan Visiting Professor and Clinic Director            
            Kathleen Kelly, Clinical Teaching Fellow
           
bj.olshansky (at) gmail.com 
            650-736-2312

U.S. Bill of  Rights Foundation
            Dane vonBreichenruchardt, President
           
usbor (at) aol.com
            202-546-7079

*    These groups and individuals support the general principles expressed and the general policy thrust and judgments in the policy proposals described above.  The allies listed do not necessarily endorse the specific language in every proposed solution, but they do agree that the proposals reflect the general principles that should govern policy in this area.  Please contact the individuals and organizations listed in this section for more information.

D.    Counter-Arguments and Rebuttal

            Intelligence officials have argued that disclosing even overall budgets year after year could allow adversaries to detect trends in intelligence spending, particularly in periods of rapid budget increases, like the one since the Sept. 11 attacks. Opposition to routine intelligence budget disclosure has been expressed by a congressional minority. 
           
The basis for their opposition has been evaluated and rejected by the 9/11 Commission, which endorsed routine disclosure, [22] and by the full Congress, which mandated disclosure on a trial basis in 2007 and 2008. Other opposition is mostly institutional in the executive branch. No adverse effects on national security have followed the disclosure of the intelligence budget.

F.      Recommended Documents for Further Review

1.      Final Report of the 9/11 Commission, at 416. http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

2.      Jehl, "Disclosing Intelligence Budgets Might Be Easiest of 9/11 Panel's Recommendations," New York Times (July 29, 2004) (http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040729-intell-budget.htm)

VI.       Preemption of State and Local Open Government Laws Promotes Secrecy

A.     The Problem

            The federal government is establishing new state-based databases for law enforcement and homeland security. Information held by state and local governments is subject to state open government and privacy laws. However, “homeland security” has been invoked to reduce transparency and limit privacy rights through: 1) secret agreements imposed by the federal government on state government; and 2) federal pressure to roll back state sunshine and privacy laws.

B.     Proposed Measures

1.      The next administration should issue guidance that instructs the all federal agencies to respect state open government and privacy laws and prohibits agencies from using contracts or memoranda of understanding to effectively limit disclosure under state and local public access laws or otherwise infringe on state government management of state record systems.

2.      The President should also direct DHS and the DOJ to make public any existing contracts or memoranda that have such effect.[23]

C.     Allies*

American Association of Law Libraries
            Mary Alice Baish, Acting Washington Affairs Representative
           
baish (at) law.georgetown.edu
            202-662-9200

American Association of University Professors
            John W. Curtis, Ph.D., Director of Research and Public Policy
           
jcurtis (at) aaup.org
            202-737-5900 (ext. 143)

American Library Association
            Lynne E. Bradley, Director
           
lbradley (at) alawash.org
            202-682-8410
            The ALA Policy Manual: The Rights of Library Users and the USA Patriot Act (52.4.5)
            available at 

            http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/governance/policymanual/policymanual.31_3.pdf

Association of Research Libraries
            Prudence Adler
           
prue (at) arl.org
            202-296-2296 (ext. 104)

Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC)
            Chip Pitts, President
           
chip.pitts (at) att.net

Center for Democracy & Technology 
            Gregory T. Nojeim
           
gnojeim (at) cdt.org
            202-637-9800 (ext 113)
            The Internet in Transition, available at
http://www.cdt.org/election2008/

Common Cause
            Sarah Dufendach, Vice President for Legislative Affairs
            202-736-5709
           
www.commoncause.org

Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
            Corey Saylor, National Legislative Director
           
csaylor (at) cair.com
            202-384-8857 (c)
            202-488-8787 (w)

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
            Anne Weismann, Chief Counsel
           
aweismann (at) citizensforethics.org
            202-408-5565
            Without a Trace, available at 
           
http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/041207WithoutATraceFullReport.pdf
            Record
Chaos, available at http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/FINAL%20REPORT.pdf

Defending Dissent Foundation
            Sue Udry, Director
           
Sue.udry (at) defendingdissent.org
            202-549-4225
           
www.defendingdissent.org

Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
            Marcia Hofman
           
marcia (at) eff.org
            415-436-9333 (ext. 116)
            A Transparency Agenda for the New Administration,
available at
           
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/11/transparency-agenda

Essential Information
            John Richard or Robert Weissman
            202-387-8034

Federation of American Scientists
            Steve Aftergood
           
saftergood (at) fas.org
            202-546-3300

Government Accountability Project
            Jesselyn Radack, Homeland Security Director
           
JesselynR (at) whistleblower.org
            202-408-0034 (ext. 107)

Liberty Coalition
            Michael D. Ostrolenk, Co-Founder/National Director
           
www.libertycoalition.net
            mostrolenk (at) libertycoalition.net
            301-717-0599

National Coalition Against Censorship
            Joan E. Bertin, Esq., Executive Director
           
bertin (at) ncac.org
            212-807-6222
            Fax: 212-807-6245

National Litigation Project of the Lowenstein International Human Rights Clinic, Yale Law School
            Hope Metcalf 
           
hope.metcalf (at) yale.edu

            Ramzi Kassem  
           
ramzi.kassem (at) yale.edu
            203-432-4800

National Security Archive
            Meredith Fuchs, General Counsel
           
mfuchs (at) gwu.edu
            202-994-7000

Northern California Association of Law Libraries
            Kelly Browne, President

OMB Watch
            Sean Moulton, Director, Federal Information Policy
            202-234-8494
            Fax: 202- 234-8584

OpenTheGovernment.org
            Patrice McDermott
           
pmcdermott (at) openthegovernment.org            
            202-332-6736

Public Citizen
            Angela Canterbury, Director of Advocacy, Public Citizen's Congress Watch Division
           
acanterbury (at) citizen.org
            202-454-5188
            Fax: 202-546-5562

Chad Scherr, Privacy Advocate
           
chad.scherr (at) gmail.com
            917-428-6005

South Asian Americans Leading Together
             Priya Murthy
             
priya (at) saalt.org
             301-270-1855

Stanford Law School  -  Mills International Human Rights Clinic
            Barbara J. Olshansky, Leah Kaplan Visiting Professor and Clinic Director
            Kathleen Kelly, Clinical Teaching Fellow
           
bj.olshansky (at) gmail.com 
            650-736-2312

U.S. Bill of  Rights Foundation
            Dane vonBreichenruchardt, President
           
usbor (at) aol.com
            202-546-7079

*    These groups and individuals support the general principles expressed and the general policy thrust and judgments in the policy proposals described above.  The allies listed do not necessarily endorse the specific language in every proposed solution, but they do agree that the proposals reflect the general principles that should govern policy in this area.  Please contact the individuals and organizations listed in this section for more information.

D.    Counter-Arguments and Rebuttal

            The 9/11 Commission recommended that federal, state, and municipal governments enhance terrorism-related information sharing. DHS argues that: 1) state-based intelligence databases implement this recommendation; and 2) the databases cannot be effective if they are subject to 51 different sets of privacy and transparency laws. Federal intelligence entities argue that limits on state privacy and transparency laws are necessary to harmonize the rules governing information sharing, and increase the amount of data shared by federal intelligence sources.
           
The 9/11 Commission Report also said information sharing programs must be accompanied by safeguards for "the privacy of individuals about whom information is shared," which the DHS has failed to establish. In the absence of a stronger federal standard, state privacy and transparency laws uphold the privacy and oversight requirements set out by the 9/11Commission. Moreover, these laws strengthen federalism and reflect the commitment of the White House's National Strategy for Information Sharing to "comply with all applicable privacy laws."
           
Finally, there is no evidence that state laws hinder anti-terrorism information sharing. Indeed, recent studies show that the primary challenge is an insufficient amount of anti-terrorism work. The vast majority of state-based intelligence databases have abandoned the exclusively anti-terrorism mission and now focus on an "all crimes" approach, which underscores the need to leave state privacy and open government laws intact.

 


[1] A partial listing of what was removed from certain agency websites is available at http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleview/213/1/1/%23agency.

[2] For instance, the March 2008 Sunshine Week poll found that 3/4 of American adults view the federal government as secretive, and nearly 9 in 10 say it’s important to know presidential and congressional candidates’ positions on open government when deciding for whom to vote.  See http://www.sunshineweek.org/sunshineweek/secrecypoll08.

[3] National Security Archive et al, Proposed Executive Memorandum on Freedom of Information Act Policy, at 1. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/foiatrans/FOIA_Transition_Recommendation.pdf

[4] Statement of Patrice McDermott to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution for the Hearing, “Restoring the Rule of Law” (September 16, 2008) (http://feingold.senate.gov/ruleoflaw/testimony/open.pdf).  See also McDermott, in Mandate for Change: Policies and Leadership for 2009 and Beyond, Lexington Press, (forthcoming January 2009).

[7] The memo and attached guidance can be found at http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/foiapost/2002foiapost10.htm.

[8] “Secrecy Report Card 2007” at 24, available at http://www.openthegovernment.org/otg/SRC2007.pdf.

[10] See 21st Century Right to Know Report, at 37-38, 86.  Legislation directed at achieving these goals has already passed in the House of Representatives: H.R. 4806 (passed House July 30, 2008); H.R. 6575 (passed House Sept. 9, 2008); H.R. 6576 (passed House July 30, 2008); H.R. 6193 (passed House July 30, 2008); see Further Reading at page 12-13.

[11] Id. (all prior references).

[13] http://www.fas.org/sgp/clinton/reno.html (“Yet while the Act's exemptions are designed to guard against harm to governmental and private interests, I firmly believe that these exemptions are best applied with specific reference to such harm, and only after consideration of the reasonably expected consequences of disclosure in any particular case.”)

[15] See “A Review of Justice Department Report on FOIA Executive Order”  (http://www.cjog.net/documents/Critique_of_Justice_on_EO.pdf.) See also “When Exemptions Become the Rule” (http://www.cjog.net/documents/Exemptions_Study.pdf.)

[16] National Security Archive et al, Proposed Executive Memorandum on Freedom of Information Act Policy, at 2. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/foiatrans/FOIA_Transition_Recommendation.pdf. See also See 21st Century Right to Know Report, at 27-28, 86.

[17] See “Information Management: The National Archives and Records Administration’s Fiscal Year 2008 Expenditure Plan,” (September, 2008) (http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-1105.)

[18] EO 13233 (http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-13233.htm.) See National Security Archive et al, Proposed Executive Order and Memorandum on Presidential Records Act and presidential records policy, at 2. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/foiatrans/PRA_Transition_Recommendation.pdf

[19] Id. Legislation to amend the Presidential Records Act was introduced in the 110th Congress. See H.R. 1255 (sponsored by H. Waxman (CA-30) (Related Senate bill is S. 886, sponsored by Sen. Bingaman (N.M.; Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs)).  We believe, however, that this legislation should be strengthened.

[20] See Testimony of Todd F. Gaziano regarding H.R. 4187, the "Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2002," before the Government Reform Committee ((April 25, 2002)

[21] Final Report of the 9/11 Commission, at page 416. http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf.

[22] See Jehl, "Disclosing Intelligence Budgets Might Be Easiest of 9/11 Panel's Recommendations," New York Times (July 29, 2004) (http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040729-intell-budget.htm)

[23] See 21st Century Right to Know Report, at 42-48.

 

Камень, конечно, позволял рассмотреть этот поток подробнее.

Тогда, вероятно, так тебе и следует поступить.

Лишняя история вреда не принесет.

Я вернулся к своим собеседникам.

Искусство требует жертв, Спайдо.

Сейджек снова оскалился и собрался заявить, что убьет всех охотников, которые придут потом.

Но это и к лучшему, поскольку в результате плевок кислотной овцы просвистел у меня над головой.

Пошли, сказал Люк и повял нас по коридору налево, к лестнице, ведущей вниз.

Поэтому при самой минимальной удаче никто не умрет, а мы получим возможность побеседовать и, наверное, добиться к концу охоты лучших отношений.

Пес бросается вперед и воет, натолкнувшись на тень, черной лошади.

Она говорила это, она наклонив голову вперед.

Лео, сидя на старой кляче, тщетно старался заставить ее двигаться быстрее, вонзая в ее бока шпоры.

Он "скачать игру хищник 2" принялся выбирать себе достаточно тяжелую "скачать интеллект карту" палку длиной фута в два.

Раньше она никогда этого не замечала.

Позволение им есть "Книга психология лжи" сладости и бездельничать.

Я мог явиться для "скачать шаблоны мемов" участия в Играх, рискнул Джек.

А теперь, сказал Аззи, пора браться за работу.

Не будь у нее ни гроша, честная, милая английская девушка достойна "Скачать сектор газа сказка" составить пару знатнейшему из людей страны.

Это могло быть просто великодушием, а может быть, он хотел завоевать популярность "скачать eisa recovery keygen" перед выборами в конгресс; хотя поговаривали, что приехать его побудило золото, полученное из прекрасных рук.

Нам не удастся уйти от бури, но избежать опасности мы можем.

У нас не то, что у вас, индейцев.

Там, впереди, лунный свет серебрил фасад Крыла, Которого Нет.

Я решил поддержать Управление, во всяком случае, в обозримом будущем.

Король Гай промычал что-то в ответ, и армия двинулась дальше.

Бобровый дом находился футах в 25 от берега и, судя по размерам, представлял "банк хоум кредит горячая линия" собой сорокафутовую пещеру с высоким потолком.

В желтых глазах пылают красные зрачки.

Мне стало известно, что герои из пьесы Аззи получают волшебных коней, сказал Михаил.

Стил пришел "взять кредит наличными онлайн" в себя и рванул штурвал.

Много лет назад, заметила она, впрочем, они провели здесь совсем немного времени.

Все эти годы я ждал, чтобы остановить процесс, вернуть исходный Баланс.

Теперь мы знаем, что тропа сворачивает в ту сторону.

Все вперед и вперед плыву я, пересекая один за другим градусы, широты "путь мирного воина скачать книгу" и климатические пояса.

Однажды утром, когда Кэтрин оставила меня одного, отправившись на свой последний летный урок, я увидел над шоссе ее самолет стеклянную стрекозу, уносящуюся в лучах солнца.

Неплохо было бы, "На солнечной стороне улицы" решил он, если бы они уничтожили друг друга.

В центре простой фасеточный глаз.

В несколько секунд остатки виски были выпиты.

Мне казалось, что я давным-давно поджидал подобное дело, но я "Азбука Набор карточек" отметил и кое-что из того, что непосредственно обеспокоили меня.

Сейчас тебе сказать ему нечего.

Кольтер подошел к нему и обнаружил круг из почерневших камней, тщательно выложенный у его подножия.

 

For more information, please read about us or contact Matthew Allee at the Constitution Project, 202-580-6922.