Slashdot Mirror


Getting Your Government Files Via the FOIA

An anonymous reader writes "The Bad Guys blog is marking America's third annual Sunshine Week: 'a national effort to cast light onto the growing recesses of government secrecy'. US News is offering up the latest information on the Freedom of Information Act, with links to filing FOI requests to US states, the federal government, and 67 other countries. 'Often the records can be obtained by simply asking for them, but since 9/11, federal agencies have grown increasingly stubborn about what they release. A just-released survey by the National Security Archive found that only 1 in 5 federal agencies meets congressionally mandated requirements for online information access. There's hope, though: A new bill is making its way through the House of Representatives, with bipartisan backing, that would strengthen the FOIA, one of a host of open government measures being looked at by the new Congress.'"

38 comments

  1. Oh nooooes! by LinuxGeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How many of us /.ers are going to find out we are so uninteresting that we dont have anything on file?

    --

    Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
    1. Re:Oh nooooes! by Khaed · · Score: 2, Funny

      Probably me. I'm really boring. No speeding tickets, no trouble in school, no arrest record.

      I've yet to even piss off an elected official or go to any protests.

      Sigh. How can I change the world yet still be lazy?

    2. Re:Oh nooooes! by e9th · · Score: 5, Funny

      Don't worry. I'm sure that just making an FOIA request will fatten up your file quickly.

    3. Re:Oh nooooes! by SMITHEE · · Score: 1

      Hey, the customer's always right.

    4. Re:Oh nooooes! by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't worry. I'm sure that just making an FOIA request will fatten up your file quickly.

      Yeah, reminds me of the story about the guy who made a FOIA request asking for a copy of his FBI file, and received a copy of his FOIA request.

  2. How about a new law? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How about a law where if you find something about yourself that doesn't serve a legitimate, warranted law enforcement purpose, the person who recorded that information on you receives a lengthy prison sentence?

    In that name of personal liberty and freedom from government abuse, it would only be fair.

    1. Re:How about a new law? by LinuxGeek · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Prison!? That is too harsh, just make it a stiff fine, but payable to the person wrongly reported or surveiled.

      --

      Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
    2. Re:How about a new law? by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      How about a law where if you find something about yourself that doesn't serve a legitimate, warranted law enforcement purpose, the person who recorded that information on you receives a lengthy prison sentence?

      Why?

      If you are intimidated by law enforcement, that information gives you evidence when you sue them. And if there's a record of you that requires a court order to get, and there's no order, you SHOULD sue them. Otherwise, well, if it doesn't affect your life then what are you worried about?

      At worst, it should get someone fired for wasting taxpayer dollars. But if a federal agent gets a hunch that you're a terrorist based on something completely random (that's what a "hunch" is, btw) they should be able to do a cursory investigation, and if we pay for an investigation we should keep that on file, just in case you really are a terrorist.

    3. Re:How about a new law? by slughead · · Score: 2, Informative

      Prison!? That is too harsh, just make it a stiff fine, but payable to the person wrongly reported or surveiled.

      There have been a few supreme court cases stating that an officer working for the executive branch cannot be charged with crimes relating to their job under most circumstances. Remember how hard it was to bust those cops in the Rondey King beating? Oh wait, they got away free.

      Invasion of privacy and searching and seizing without warrants is usually punishable by suspension. A cop will never worry about going to jail unless they inflict physical harm upon somebody else.

      Something that should warm your heart even more: According to the Supreme Court, cops are NOT required to protect you. Ever.

      They can watch you be shot, stabbed, raped, or anything else while doing nothing. They cannot be charged or even disciplined for inaction. Moreover, even if ordered to "serve and protect" directly, the worst that can happen if they refuse is.. you guessed it, suspension. It's not the military, it's just one step up from an armed security guard.

      That's one of the many reasons I own a gun.

    4. Re:How about a new law? by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's one of the many reasons I own a gun.

      It's one of the reasons that I try to be civil and friendly to the cops. If they feel like they are part of the same community as me, they're more likely to voluntarily 'do a bit more than they have to' to help me.

    5. Re:How about a new law? by slughead · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's one of the reasons that I try to be civil and friendly to the cops. If they feel like they are part of the same community as me, they're more likely to voluntarily 'do a bit more than they have to' to help me.

      Well, you can suck up to authority and *hope* they protect you all you want. I'll sleep better at night with Hans and his MG-42 behind my front door waiting for a beach landing on my porch. ... FROM HANS' COLD DEAD HANDS!!

      Happy St. Patty's day everybody! *black out*

    6. Re:How about a new law? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      It's one of the reasons that I try to be civil and friendly to the cops. If they feel like they are part of the same community as me, they're more likely to voluntarily 'do a bit more than they have to' to help me.

      Too basd you have to, in effect, bribe them in order to get the protection your taxes pay for.

      Too bad that demanding that they do their jobs will only cause them to provoke you into an escalation where they can really fuck you over.

      Too bad that you have to knuckle under to the fucking nazis to avoid their wrath.

      Never forget: To a cop, there are only three kinds of people in the world -- cops, cops' families and suspects.

    7. Re:How about a new law? by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      Do you 'suck up' to all your buddies? What's that slurping sound I hear? I don't consider that the behavior I engage in. Do what you like with this 'Hans' person, I guess.

    8. Re:How about a new law? by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      Too bad that you have to knuckle under to the fucking nazis to avoid their wrath.

      You should really be seeing a therapist about those delusions.

    9. Re:How about a new law? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Never forget: To a cop, there are only three kinds of people in the world -- cops, cops' families and suspects.

      Four: ex-spouses.

    10. Re:How about a new law? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      I think ex-spouses comes under suspects.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  3. Security Clearance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Maybe now I can find out why my interim security clearance was denied.

    1. Re:Security Clearance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry. Classified.

    2. Re:Security Clearance by LinuxGeek · · Score: 3, Funny

      Obviously the government wont hand out security clearances to Anonymous Cowards. Duh.

      --

      Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
  4. Irony by cyberbob2351 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In contrast, the U.S. legislation, as generally interpreted, presumes that all government records should be public-unless officials can show very good reasons to exempt them,

    Read : Yeah you can have this information, so long as for some reason you can't.

    Anyone else find it ironic that we are hard pressed to definitively outline the rights given to us, seeing as how the information about the act is cast in such a vague light by all those that quote it in daily life. The only anecdotal stories I hear concerning it involve lots of black markers, and a ton of hogwash project bluebook manuscripts that appear in underground ufology rings.
    --
    for sale
    I'm a self-modifying sig virus
    1. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone else find it ironic that we are hard pressed to definitively outline the rights given to us, seeing as how the information about the act is cast in such a vague light by all those that quote it in daily life.
      Better go read the Constitution pal, I know what rights are mine. (all of them except those delegated) Its getting the imperial federal government to recognize them that's the problem.
    2. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      In contrast, the U.S. legislation, as generally interpreted, presumes that all government records should be public-unless officials can show very good reasons to exempt them,

      Unfortunately, this concept has been made meaningless by the democracy-fucking bastards in the Bush administration.

      Under the Reno Doj, the principle in FOIA requests was, "Absent a national security concern, release the information."

      Almost the first act of the cursed-forever Ashcroft DoJ was to upend that policy and declare, "Absent a court order, withhold the information."

      These cocksuckers should spend eternity in the lowest pit of hell.

  5. can someone please answer me something? by circletimessquare · · Score: 0, Troll

    why would anyone care what the government has on file about you?

    i'm not talking about the secret police in a former east bloc country now, please, get real

    just seems like a retarded exercise in vanity on the applicant's part, or a cry for help due to progressing paranoid schizophrenia

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:can someone please answer me something? by Danimoth · · Score: 1

      Tell that to MLK.

      --
      No smoking sigs indoors.
  6. Transparent email/phone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Speaking of transparent government, why don't we require all government officials (sans national security) to have their email and phone communication openly viewable by anyone? I think the folks in charge like to throw stones, and it would only be fitting to put them in a glass house. FOIA may allow this now but it should be instant, online, 24/7/365.

    1. Re:Transparent email/phone? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      No, because usage of email and phone for private usage is also allowed by government departments. What's that I hear? Lawyers salivating over the violation of privacy lawsuits?

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  7. my paper by Wordsmith · · Score: 3, Informative

    Call it blatant link-whoring if you'd like, but I figured I'd provide a pointer to some resources on Sunshine Week my newspaper, a small Rhode Island Daily, put together - located here. Our stories this year weren't really in-depth analyses, just overviews and features of the current FOI climate in our area, but we hope they were interesting nonetheless.

  8. right by mastershake_phd · · Score: 1

    Like they are going to tell you if they have any real interesting stuff on you.

  9. Uninteresting? by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

    How many of us /.ers are going to find out we are so uninteresting that we dont have anything on file? Hah.. even if that turns out to be the case, all it proves is that my tinfoil hat is working.
    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
  10. There's Hope! by susano_otter · · Score: 1

    There's hope, though: A new bill is making its way through the House of Representatives, with bipartisan backing, that would strengthen the FOIA, one of a host of open government measures being looked at by the new Congress.

    Oh, well, if the politicians are talking about passing a law, then our problems are almost over! Leave it to politicians to understand the problem, figure out the right solution, and save the day!
    --

    Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  11. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Parent is absolutely right and should not be modded troll.

  12. Do any of you have a clue? by whitroth · · Score: 1

    Folks,

          First, I've never done this, because I've been afraid of the charges (used to be something like over a dollar a page for "copying, etc". Secondly, they'll give at least some... but a) you need to ask the right agency, and b) you may find that you have 150 pages... with 50% of it "redacted" (i.e., a black marker over the info).

          But, yes, you *can* get the info they have on you. Or, based on the first few comments I've read, do y'all believe that we live under, oh, Hitler or Stalin, and everyone who works for the gov't, including every mail carrier, have Sold Their Souls, and are your enemy? And in *that* case, what the *hell* are y'all doing online, and not hiding out like a survivalist, out in the woods, completely off the grid?

                    mark

  13. mlk DID have a reason by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    i'm talking about the usual slashdotter. why should they care?

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  14. Getting Your Government Files Via the FOIA by frogephant · · Score: 4, Informative

    I would suggest that using FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) to get "your government files" from the Federal government is not the way to go. FOIA only applies to information that is public--e.g., how many civilian employees does the Energy Department have or what is the budget for paper clips in the division of widget design. FOIA does not apply to most personal information. You are much more likely to get information about yourself which is maintained by the Federal government by filing a request under the Privacy Act. There are many exceptions to what has to be disclosed under the Privacy Act; but, as a former Federal FOIA & Privacy Act officer, let me tell you that there are many more exceptions under FOIA--one of them being information whose disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy. If you really want to file under FOIA, then include mention of the Privacy Act too or you may be surprised how little information get.

    1. Re: Getting Your Government Files Via the FOIA by bmasel · · Score: 1

      For your own files, yes, apply jointly under FOIA and Privacy Acts.

      Time I apply again. Last, applications, in 1979, turned up 850 pages with the FBI, 99 with the Secret Service, and 9 with the Postal inspectors.

      --
      Ben Masel: 51,282 votes for US Senate in the Wisconsin Democratic Primary
  15. FYI / Useful Info, if you want data from USG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Posting AC because of accont problems.

    I was a former Public Affairs rep. for the USG. Left when I saw what a total crapfest it was, but learnded the following - the Dept. of Defense (I assume others, but DoD for sure) is paranoically afraid of few things, but one of them is the Congressional Inquiry, or 'CONGREN'. A FOIA request has to be very specific and can take a long time to process even if you ask for exactly what you want (which you may not even know - they want document numbers in some cases, which would be tough to get, as there is no public 'catalog'). A CONGREN is an inquiry from your friendly neighborhood Congressperson, who sends a nice form letter to whomever (base commander is the one we used to see a lot) requesting information or documentation on a particular matter.

    For example, if poor Johnny is being picked on by his drill instuctor in boot camp, mommy can have Congressman Smith send a CONGREN requesting information about why Johnny has been to sick bay 4 times in two weeks. The CONGREN goes to the base commander, who gives it to the battalion commander, who gives it to the company commander, who gives it to the platoon commander who goes to the drill instructor for information and then forwards it back up the chain to the base commander, who sends it off to the Congressman, cc-ing the mommy (usually). Total time: 8 days from receipt to response (see below - time is a legal matter).

    Congresspeople, say what you like, LOVE to do 'constituent service' by sending these for people in their districts. They don't HAVE TO, but they do - ask nicely, remind them you vote, be very specific about what you want.

    Here's the kicker - a CONGREN has to (by Federal law!) spend no more than 24 hours at a given level of command. So, if you send one to the Commander of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he has one day for each level of command to get you an answer - so, it might take a week or two, but if you narrow it down enough, you should get an answer dated no later than a week after it is received.

    I have no idea if this works for the FBI. CIA, etc., but it can't hurt...

    This post will self-destruct in ten seconds. Good luck.