States Pass Thousands of Info Restriction Laws

nebaz writes "The AP has published an article analyzing over 1000 laws passed by state legislatures since 9/11, and discovered a disturbing trend. More and more information is being made unavailable to the public. Some of this information may seem reasonable, dealing with national security and all, but there are other things, such as safety plans at schools, medication errors at nursing homes, and disciplinary actions against state employees, that are becoming restricted." From the article: "In statehouse battles, the issue has pitted advocates of government openness - including journalists and civil liberties groups - against lawmakers and others who worry that public information could be misused, whether it's by terrorists or by computer hackers hoping to use your credit cards. Security concerns typically won out."

Comments

privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is it the government can make pretty much anything secret even when it has nothing to do with security, and meanwhile citizens are losing more and more privacy from things like warrantless wiretapping? Bunch of hypocrites.

Re:privacy

[antarctican]

Why is it the government can make pretty much anything secret even when it has nothing to do with security, and meanwhile citizens are losing more and more privacy from things like warrantless wiretapping? Bunch of hypocrites.

Because politicians don't like public scrutiny. They suddenly have an excuse to close off access for information which could be used to hold them accountable or embrassass them. They like to make decisions behind closed doors which benefit themselves and their supporters and not have the nosey public interfering, heaven forbid the information could be used to toss them from office.

Up north we're experiencing a similar problem at the federal and provincial (BC) level. Governments which are increasingly becoming more secret in their dealings and contracts - and we don't even have them using security as an excuse! Combine this with an apathetic public which just assumes all government is corrupt and you have a situation where the politicians get away with whatever they please.

It's typical of right-wing governments, they know their agendas mainly benefit a small, elite group despite any rhetoric they may spew. This is why they like secrecy so much, heaven forbid the public actually catch on to the number that's being pulled on them.

The solution is to stop whining and actually become politically active. Our cousins to the south certainly have a bigger battle ahead of them with a two party system where both parties are self-serving groups of individuals with a complete disconnect from the ordinary citizen. But if we continue fighting, in time we can wake the public up to this assault on democracy and freedom.

Re:privacy

[BrynM]

The solution is to stop whining and actually become politically active.

Though you are in many ways correct, that is an idealistic point of view to hold here in the US. To ask a typical american to be "active" for anything sounds too much like work to them. Then come the mental justifications and excuses such as "I don't have time" or "well it really isn't my problem - it's waaaayyy over there". Further, to say "just participate" and not hand someone the tools to do it is a cop-out too many intelligent americans use.

Instead, I've found it's better to encourage people to simply question everything - especially motivation. Then teach them to link up where they were right and be willing to laugh when they are wrong.

For example, someone I knew was addicted to celebrity life and tabloid-ish who's hot and who's not type things. Any mention of politics would get his pat answer: "That may be life, but that's not living. Next Subject." It really bothered me that someone who was intelligent, cynical and funny could be that closed-minded.

So I started pointing out that someone who was getting press in a slow crescendo (ie:"hot pictures" then "shocking scandal" then "heartfelt interview") probably had something like a movie or a book in the works. He eventually began to see when particular celebrity marketing machines were accelerating to generate buzz as well. Finally, he learned that he could apply those observation skills to anything. Today, he loves to talk politics as much as music. (Note: I didn't plan for this, but learned from what was happening over the course of months).

"Question everything" is a cliche for a reason. Good advice is often repeated. Luckily it turns out that people actually like to be sceptical, but most don't know how to do it critically. Once they know how, they can't help but participate in some way.

1983?

[jimktrains]

Lately the ignorance and stupidity of the populace and governments has started to bother me. All the stupid patents, stupid laws, stuff that is suppose to be good, but is implement horrible (read: welfare and the new prescriptions drug thing for seniors, for starters). There is no need for the government to pass many of the laws it does, and I think that this makes good examples of the government making laws that are suppose to help people but do more harm, but what can a citizen do if no one else cares (or do other people care, and I not know these people, equally possible)?

Police State In Construction?

[Anonymous Coward]

The US and the UK seem more and more to be a police state in development. Look at this video that shows evidence supporting that: http://revradio.org/movies/ml.wmv

please sign st911 petition

[rattler14]

The scholars for 9/11 truthbelieve this is no mere coincidence. Through analysis of the physics, it has been concluded that WTC7 fell in a manner not consistent with a "pancake" theory. They are asking for full access to the evidence (photos, video, etc) that NIST used in their report to either support or rebut these claims. So even if you think they are "conspiracy nuts", the release of these documents would prove them wrong... so do it. Sign the petition :) Yes, I expect to be vehemently attacked. But whatever. What good is karma if you can't speak your true beliefs!

Re:Re

[LeonGeeste]

Agree and disagree. If Congress created the SSN with the specific condition that no business ever use it as a way of identifying someone (which they did, and which people violate routinely), they need to put a stop to this. But I seriously doubt it would help the problem that you describe. If the SSN weren't around, credit agencies would just create a different unique identifier that they would all share, and it would be just as hard to take out a loan or hide from a credit record. Asking that lenders make loans with no clue who you are or what your history of paying back load is, creates a huge adverse selection problem. Not that you were advocating this but someone always suggests that in such discussions.

You're of course right that they need to better protect this, but my question is, why hasn't competition between lenders and between credit reporters sorted this out already?

Obligatory Chomsky

[michaelhood]

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate." Noam Chomsky

Problem...

[C10H14N2]

"Educated people" think these things are in their interest.

No matter how idiotic one side seems to be on an issue, it's counter-productive to boil it down to ignorance vs. education, intelligence vs. stupidity, because often, you're arguing with educated, intelligent people who have different values and interests. How many times has the argument about state-sponsored [X] come down to: only stupid people find anything of value in socialism and only an ignorant person would think that socialism is inherently bad. So, then we move on to good vs. evil and all that non-sense.

IMHO the problem is idealism in general. The Left (in the USA) has become LESS idealistic than it used to be--which is actually a GOOD thing, in theory--while The Right has become outright militant in its idealism. Unfortunately, it's rather hard to fight popular, militant idealism with pragmatism...but that may change as people tire of these fights and simply want things to be functional. We may see that as early as November.

Actually the terrorists have won

[Anonymous Coward]

security is not what they are concerned about.

Actually it is, the US is losing a war. Terrorism works by introducing more laws and more police-state actions on the target population. The terrorists really are winning, but the US government is too arrogant to see it. They are more concerned about new bombs and bodycounts as predictors of victory.

John Boyd the military strategist stated that one of the most important underpinnings of war is morality. To beat a country morally you have to morally isolate it. Look how morally isolated the US is now. It is selfish (communal safety trumps individual freedom) and they violate the rules of behaviour they profess to uphold. The US doesn't have a moral leg to stand on.

Re:Actually the terrorists have won

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, I remember how Donald Rumsefeld comes out every day to give us the total number of terrorists killed so far... oh wait, he doesn't. In fact, the DoD has been trying to stay as far away from bodycounts as possible. Strangely, the emphasis seems to be on things such as elections and constitutions and infrastructure as measures of success.

Let's see, when was the last time body counts were the way the DoD measured a war's success? Why, it was Vietnam. Someone needs to check his clock and make sure that it's plugged in. You may also want to know that in the thiry years you have been absent from this world "free love" has died due to a little thing called AIDS. I suggest you get yourself tested.

And when did the US ever try to beat anyone "morally?" What were we dropping out of those flying fortresses anyway? Bibles? Did we build soup kitchens in Nagasaki to get Japan to surrender? Was that Habitat for Humanity we sent in to Latin America to contain Communism? I'm confused by this utopian vision of a by-gone age where the US didn't get its hands dirty or act selfishly in order to get where it is today.

And psst... did you know that we lost the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, World War I, and World War II because the government introduced new laws and police state actions on the population? We almost lost the Mexican War, but fortunately Congress still kept that standing army small! Unfortunately, the Spanish completely massacred us in the Spanish-American war by making us an empire.

Why all these laws?

[iminplaya]

When all they have to do is copyright everything. Hey, it works for Scientology. If everything like the weather service and map makers, etc. goes private, then IP law will have more teeth than those against murder and rape. It won't be long before a freedom of information request becomes a DMCA violation. If that doesn't work, then all you need to do is scream "terrorist!" at anyone who dares to question the authority of the gov't. Y'all let me know when you wake up from your slumber and start to vote these bums out of office. The change has to come from your own selves. Until you take action, you will find that this is only the beginning. "You aint seen nuttin yet."

Voltaire

[Millenniumman]

A witty saying proves nothing.

Re:Here is all you need to know about this:

[Anonymous Coward]

Here is another great one that was posted by the New York Times yesterday: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/11/national/11terro r.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin Imagine being charged with a crime, but the evidence is classified, the judge's rulings are classified, and the government's response to the defense team's motion for dismissal is classified. So here you are sitting in jail, hoping that the American legal system (where you are innocent until proven guilty) will not fail you, and your defense lawyers are prevented from reading ANYTHING about the case... because it's all classified. How is that for a free country?

Re:Here is all you need to know about this:

[imthesponge]

"Did you know that there is new legislation about to be passed that makes it a felony for any newspaper/journalist to publish a story about FISA, or about GWB's wiretapping program?"

Citation please.

Remember Folks...

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember folks, when you're asking questions and not being a patriot: you're letting the terrorists win.

America's pissing in the wind. Stop being silent and start asking questions.

Some people need to read this: http://www.law.indiana.edu/uslawdocs/declaration.h tml