Obama Learns Newspeak: The Administration's Perversion of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

Forbes ^ | 11/9/2011 | Harvey Silverglate

[bruinbirdman]

President Obama should know better. Our constitutional-law-professor-in-chief has, once again, taken the government to unprecedented levels of secrecy while institutionalizing the perversions of our seemingly never-ending war-on-terror. On October 30th, the administration, without seeking Congressional authorization, proposed an executive rule that will license governmental agencies to issue bald-faced lies to the citizenry, making a mockery not only of the Freedom of Information Act, but of the President’s supposed promise of transparency.

Early in his presidency in 2009, in a “memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies” regarding proposed changes to the operation of the Freedom of Information Act, President Obama extolled the virtues of governmental openness, stating that

A democracy requires accountability, and accountability requires transparency. As Justice Louis Brandeis wrote, “sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.” In our democracy, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which encourages accountability through transparency, is the most prominent expression of a profound national commitment to ensuring an open Government. At the heart of that commitment is the idea that accountability is in the interest of the Government and the citizenry alike.

Much has changed in the last two and a half years. On October 30th, the government proposed rule changes under FOIA, which include a provision that

when a component applies an exclusion to exclude records from the requirements of the FOIA pursuant to 5 U.S.C.552 (c), the component utilizing the exclusion will respond to the request as if the excluded records did not exist. The response should not differ in wording from any other response given by the component

[bruinbirdman]

"UPDATE: Under pressure from legislators, including Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the Obama Administration has retracted its proposed rule change to the Freedom of Information Act. While we are gratified that the changes were never implemented, we remain quite disturbed that the administration proposed them in the first place. Our original article is above. "

[RedStateRocker]

There are people here who would be tumescent if President Bush had proposed doing the same things in 2003 or so.

[BenLurkin]

seemingly never-ending war-on-terror.

Does this person not know how many decades it took the Euros to drive Islam back into Northern Africa?

[TribalPrincess2U]

Obama: “I am tired about reading about a Justice Department that does not understand Justice”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1usjoaPyIdU

PASS IT ALONG.

[C210N]

In other words, what they don’t know that we know can’t hurt us.

[DJ Frisat]

"While we are gratified that the changes were never implemented, we remain quite disturbed that the administration proposed them in the first place."

What I fear and expect: Just because it wasn't "implemented" as official policy doesn't necessarily mean that it won't be employed as if it were.