Obama Announces Open Data Policy With Executive Order

In an overdue but welcome move, President Obama today issued an executive order mandating "open and machine-readable data" for government-published information. Also, kodiaktau writes "In a move to make data more readily available, the United States of America has announced the Project Open Data and has chosen GitHub to host the content." Ars has a great article on the announced policy, but as you might expect, it comes with caveats, exceptions, sub-goals and committees; don't expect too much change per day, or assume you have a right to open data, exactly, in the eyes of the government, but — "subject to appropriations" — it sounds good on paper. (I'd like the next step to be requiring that all file formats used by the government be open source.)

Comments

Only right use of an Executive Order I've seen

[ModernGeek]

This is the first time that I've seen someone talk about President Obama and Executive Orders in a way that makes sense. It is my understanding that Executive Orders have to do with the internal operations of the government, not as a mechanism of usurping congress when it comes to laws that have an effect on the American public.

Re:Only right use of an Executive Order I've seen

[msauve]

It's not just Obama. There's a rich history of Presidents using EOs to try and get out of their duty to execute the law. It's been a bipartisan dereliction of duty (and illegitimate power grab).

But yes, you're right in that this sounds like a legitimate use - ordering an execution of the law which makes it more accessible.

Re:Only right use of an Executive Order I've seen

[girlintraining]

It is my understanding that Executive Orders have to do with the internal operations of the government, not as a mechanism of usurping congress when it comes to laws that have an effect on the American public.

People seem to forget Executive Order 9066, which led to the creation of internment camps for "Japanese-americans" (or as I call them, citizens) during WWII. There's a great many more examples of executive orders going far beyond "internal operations of the government." And yes, Obama, like every other president has penned some questionable executive orders.

Of course, even snarking the President on slashdot is a hanging offense, so god help me for suggesting this; But it's clear that every administration. Every. Administration. Has used executive orders to expand the power of the executive branch, or as you put it "usurping congress". Whether this is a problem or not depends largely on your personal political preferences and which party controls the white house at the moment... but historically, they have a long tradition of going far beyond "internal operations of the government"... at least as I suspect you're thinking of it.

Re:Only right use of an Executive Order I've seen

[the eric conspiracy]

Executive orders have been held to have force of law in US History except under two cases:

1. Congress passes a countervailing law with a veto-proof majority.

2. The Supreme Court invalidates the order as unconstitutional.

1952 was the first time (2) occurred.

There have been some pretty significant executive orders, including Jackson's specie circular requiring that payment for federal lands be done in gold or silver, and FDR order that the military round up Japanese and German Americans in military zones.

Harry Truman desegregated the military via executive order, and Eisenhower did the same for public schools by executive order.

George Bush's order to restrict access to presidential papers was equally controversial.

Re:Only right use of an Executive Order I've seen

[msauve]

It constantly amazes me - the two parties have focused the electorate against each other, while they collude in common cause - building and maintaining power.

Re:Only right use of an Executive Order I've seen

[msauve]

"Executive orders have been held to have force of law in US History except under two cases"

Growing wheat for your own use has been held to be "interstate commerce." So much for that argument. Don't quote judicial decisions as part of a logical argument, they're two different worlds.

Re:Only right use of an Executive Order I've seen

[ATMAvatar]

We are merely mice voting for black or white cats.

Re: Only right use of an Executive Order I've seen

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm, perhaps you are unaware of the hearings the House of Representatives are holding with regard to the actions of Obama, Hiliary, the State Department and White House over the events in Benghazi eight months ago. The refusal to come to the aid of an Ambassador and SEALs for eight hours, with a real-time Predator drone overhead (so the US could see what was going on in real time), and then a cover up (lying) for weeks, then no impartial investigation for eight months is simply *criminal*. It is far far worse than internment camps (as bad as they were).

The message for the World is, the US will not come to your aid, no matter whether you are a US Ambassador, SEAL, ally (Mubarak), or country (Israel). America is no longer the greatest country on the Earth for promoting and defending Western values. That was Obama's intention.

Re:Only right use of an Executive Order I've seen

[davester666]

You would think a Republican-led Congress would be inclined to limit what a Democrat as President does.

But it turns out...they would rather just let him do whatever, so when their guy gets in, he also gets to do 'whatever'.

And vice versa.

Re: Only right use of an Executive Order I've seen

[Ksevio]

Right...a confusing and hostile situation (which the President and staff clearly botched) that happened over an evening is comparable to a planned out and very public taking of American's rights?

It might be fun to jump on the whole government conspiracy bandwagon, but the two situations are in no way comparable. There are a lot of questions about Benghazi and some answers may seem obvious now in retrospect, but the Japanese Interment was clearly wrong.