Slashdot Mirror
America Expands Its Freedom of Information Act (washingtonpost.com)
An anonymous reader writes:
As America headed into its "Independence Day weekend," the U.S. Congress passed -- and President Obama signed -- the "FOIA Improvements Act of 2016". It now establishes a "presumption of disclosure" by law, and will even allow the disclosure of "deliberative process" records after 25 years, meaning those records from the Reagan (and prior) administrations should now become open, according to the Washington Post. In addition, the law also creates a comprehensive new "online request portal" for requesting records from all agencies, and even requires those agencies to make digital copies available for any records requested three or more times.
"By updating FOIA for the digital age, our law puts more government information than ever before online in a format familiar and accessible to the American people," said Senator Leahy, who sponsored the legislation. On the 50th anniversary of America's original Freedom of Information Act, Leahy added that "a government of, by, and for the people cannot be one that is hidden from them... "
It's the law's 50th anniversary, and Leahy imagined a world 50 years in the future, when the next generation "will look back at this moment and gauge our commitment to the founding principles of our democracy. Let them see that we continued striving for a 'more perfect union' by strengthening the pillar of transparency that holds our government accountable to "We the People.' "
"By updating FOIA for the digital age, our law puts more government information than ever before online in a format familiar and accessible to the American people," said Senator Leahy, who sponsored the legislation. On the 50th anniversary of America's original Freedom of Information Act, Leahy added that "a government of, by, and for the people cannot be one that is hidden from them... "
It's the law's 50th anniversary, and Leahy imagined a world 50 years in the future, when the next generation "will look back at this moment and gauge our commitment to the founding principles of our democracy. Let them see that we continued striving for a 'more perfect union' by strengthening the pillar of transparency that holds our government accountable to "We the People.' "
And the President signed the law on the same day that the State Department said they needed an additional 27 months to release emails between Department of State employees and the Clinton Foundation. Nothing to see here, move on....
How's Kennedy Assassination documents declassification going? They were supposed to hit the public sometime this year, I heard.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
... like any other she feels shouldn't apply to her.
The president with the worst history of blanket denial of FOIA requests, running the most opaque government in our lifetime, signs a law "improving" the FOIA system. What a joke! If he and his executive branch didn't respect it before, they wont respect it now.
I was reading on a gun blog recently about a lawyer who sent the FBI an FOIA wanting to know what offenses would make a person a "domestic abuser" and disqualify them from buying a gun. The FBI said the list was secret and refused to answer. There's your most transparent administration ever!
The BATFE has stopped responding to FOIAs completely. If you want anything from them, you have to sue, pay for counsel, and wait for the lethargic court system to sort it out for a few years. They've even claimed they're not subject to FOIA requests AT ALL!
http://www.guns.com/2015/08/12...
"This memorandum does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person."
Am I reading that right? A presumption of disclosure is what they claim...but don't hold them to it?
Is it just me -- or in the times of TSA, of ever-expanding data greed by nearly every three-letter agency, of quenching whistleblowers wherever feasible... all this sounds like 1984's newspeak? Ministry of Love? (in this case possibly: Ministry of Light).
Shudder.
Nevermind the Crooked Hillary! illegal email server that had classified data with markings on it - where Obama and his flunkies are doing their utter best to whitewash it... (And yeah, ALL THAT ABOUT CROOKED HILLARY!'S EMAIL SERVER IS DOCUMENTED - AT LEAST GROW SOME BALLS AND ADMIT YOU SUPPORT A CROOKED LYING SACK OF SHIT)
‘Most Transparent Administration’ Sets FOIA Censorship Record
In 2014, the Obama administration set a record: It censored or refused to release more government records—accessible to the public through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)—than in any preceding year.
In 250,581 cases, or 39 percent of total requests, anywhere from a few words to every word was censored, or access was fully denied. In 215,584 other instances, the government said the records could not be found, decided the request was unreasonable or the requester refused to pay the associated fees. When the government did decide to hand over government files, the process took longer on average than in years past—anywhere between one day and 2.5 years.
The self-proclaimed “most transparent administration” also admitted that its decision to withhold or censor documents was inappropriate under the law in almost a third of cases—but only after the requester challenged the government’s initial decision.
Exemption 1: Information that is classified to protect national security. Exemption 2: Information related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency. Exemption 3: Information that is prohibited from disclosure by another federal law. Exemption 4: Trade secrets or commercial or financial information that is confidential or privileged. Exemption 5: Privileged communications within or between agencies, including: Deliberative Process Privilege Attorney-Work Product Privilege Attorney-Client Privilege Exemption 6: Information that, if disclosed, would invade another individual's personal privacy. Exemption 7: Information compiled for law enforcement purposes that: 7(A). Could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings 7(B). Would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication 7(C). Could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy 7(D). Could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source 7(E). Would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions 7(F). Could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual Exemption 8: Information that concerns the supervision of financial institutions. Exemption 9: Geological information on wells.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
The law itself specifies that no additional funds are authorized to comply with the new requirements, so we'll see how these changes will actually be implemented. The Washington Post article cited in the summary already notes "Federal agencies have often starved their FOIA departments for resources; the new law will not change that. Backlogs stretch for years."
So, yeah. In theory, it gives broader and easier access to records. In practice, expect to wait forever to have your records request processed, just as before.
Not only they lie in your face, now they even taunt you!
They care so much about your freedom they will take it all away and lock it somewhere safe so nothing bad can happen to it!
The president with the worst history of blanket denial of FOIA requests, running the most opaque government in our lifetime, signs a law "improving" the FOIA system. What a joke! If he and his executive branch didn't respect it before, they wont respect it now.
I didn't like Obama either time he ran for president and I still don't like him. I felt like his worldview was completely wrong, and would cause overall harm to the country. However, his promise of transparency was the one thing about him that made me say, "if he actually follows through on this, we as the people will stand a decent chance of fixing our government for the first time in modern history because we'll know what they are really doing." Of course, I also thought, "we'll see how long it lasts if he gets elected." One key element of Obama's promise was that every piece of legislation would be posted to the Congress' website after passage by both houses before he would sign it in order allow for public comment. I believe it was supposed to be a minimum of five days. As far as I can tell, that hasn't happened once even going back to the first piece of legislation he signed. It certainly didn't happen with the Affordable Care Act, and the way he has been using Executive Orders (some of them secret) to get around Congress one could reasonably conclude that Obama never intended to be transparent, but only said that to appeal to the younger libertarian and classical liberal crowd.
In fact, I would say the best description of Obama is, "meet the new boss, same as the old boss." There are plenty of things I dislike about Trump in this election cycle, but whatever you think of him, he certainly won't be "same as the old boss." Hillary, on the other hand, well...
There is a cynicism upgrade available which will restart the modules.
My money is on Ulysses Grant as the worst president ever. Great general but way out of depth in the political field. Reagan had a major part in the fall of the Soviet Union with him opening up communications with them. I could see Soviet army commanders opening fire on East European protesters if they saw no other option for their existence with hostile US and Western Europe.
My money is on Ulysses Grant as the worst president ever.
Worst, presidents who got us into wars for money. The list is long, but distinguished, just like my johnson. Second worst, presidents who delayed us getting into wars for money at the cost of innocent lives, i.e. WWII. Tied for first place: Presidents who compromise our rights. Lots of presidents are tied for first place, including the last four or five we've had.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
.. why don't they call it "Thank France Day" ?
Just curious...
Good luck with that given two words: Barack Obama
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
As usual, if there is something positive coming from Washington and it involves a Democrat, slashdot cannot identify that person as one. I'm surprised this story even made the front page.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
But it is the most transparent administration ever! Can you ever name any before this one where you could see so clearly that the emperor has no clothes?
How much more transparent could it get?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Not even close. Hoover and his handling of the economic crisis 29 was way worse. Carter and ... pretty much all of the 4 years. And Ford's best feature was probably also the length of his presidency.
They just don't make 'em like Eisenhower anymore. Pretty much the only really good one the US had in the past 100 years. Level headed, efficient, not some gimmicky-flashy show man, simply a president.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If you think Trump doesn't intend to screw you over like there was no tomorrow then you are delusional.
Clinton still answers to the party and can't leave a completely ruined world to the next in line.
It's the law's 50th anniversary, and Leahy imagined a world 50 years in the future, when the next generation "will look back at this moment and gauge our commitment to the founding principles of our democracy.
Indeed they will. And they'll look back at the DHS, TSA, and the Patriot act and laugh at his quote. Or the DHS may have outlawed laughter by they and those who laugh will be executed because, terrorists.
It's not just Obama... it's the ENTIRE Government.
I've read a LOT of random classified stuff, leaks and whatnot, enough to see maybe a hundred examples of shit they blacked out and redacted, and the SAME document later unredacted. NONE, ABSOLUTELY NONE, of the formerly redacted stuff was anything "gravely damaging" to the country. The ONLY thing it was ever gravely damaging to was.... THE GOVERNMENT AND IT'S POLITICIANS AND MUCKITY MUCK BULLSHIT AT HOME AND AROUND THE WORLD.
Fuck the government, they're worthless and cause more problems than it's worth.
And I'm tired of paying taxes to support them, their waste, and all their bullshit that's harming us.
All of the bills introduced in congress are posted same-day on https://www.congress.gov/. I don't know about the 5 days thing, but I think it is quite rare for bills to be introduced, passed and signed that quick. I looked at a few of the bills on there and none of them were passed in less than a month after they were introduced, and none of them were signed in fewer than a few weeks after they were passed.
In a free and open society why do we even have to request for PUBLIC records? Why not make them available on-line for all to see.
but more than enough to trick the mind-numb Americans.
Trump will mess you up to his benefit. Hillary will mess you up to her party's benefit. Who do you think has more to mess you up about.
Truman. Last President ever who, after he left Office, just went home. No permanent Secret Service detail, none of the privileges modern Presidents get for life....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
See gselinks.com for what Obama thinks about the freedom of information. His administration wants to keep an unprecedented 10k documents from seeing the light of day.
All of the bills introduced in congress are posted same-day on https://www.congress.gov/. I don't know about the 5 days thing, but I think it is quite rare for bills to be introduced, passed and signed that quick. I looked at a few of the bills on there and none of them were passed in less than a month after they were introduced, and none of them were signed in fewer than a few weeks after they were passed.
If they weren't signed within 10 days, they become law automatically. So, no, I doubt they were all posted for a few weeks before being signed.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
You make a good point, but why can't you think about the children?!
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Nonsense. He's clearly wearing a coat that's a nice shade of green.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
he certainly won't be "same as the old boss."
Aside from aesthetics (eg, actually yelling at people who may or may not need to be yelled at), Trump won't change shit.
Not even the horrific tyranny that is 'signing statements' don't even give the office of the president the power people seem to attribute to that office.
Trump won't change shit. Sanders wouldn't have changed shit. Hillary loves bathing in the current shit. So, we're stuck with a shitshow, no matter who gets in.
Because nobody is going to vote to replace the Gentleman from Pork For My State.
You blame 9/11 on the election of GWB. You're dumber than a pile of excrement that has already cooled off.
Should we all assume that you are ina position to know what would be gravely damaging if the right people saw the same information? I think about classified documents in the same way I think about HIPAA documents. A medical condition isn't secret or private, until you associate out with a particular person. Even then, you will still find this info on social media, and the people posting it think there is no problem. Somehow this information is considered more sensitive if employers and insurers find out about it. Same information, but the audience matters.
National security isn't the only reason for redaction; it's not even the most common one. Off the top of my head, reasons for redaction of information (sometimes withholding the entire document) include: presence of personally identifying information that is not work contact information; medical information pertaining to a person; internal process documentation; active police investigation; active prosecution or court involvement; trade secrets; or exemption from disclosure granted by other law. There are others; apparently in the US, documents related to oil and gas wells are exempt from FOIA requests.
After a while, some of those may cease to apply, or the law may change. You can end up with an unredacted document which doesn't seem that different from the redacted one. There's definitely rules-lawyering and obstruction that takes advantage of the law or puts up as many road blocks as possible (usually involving time), but even good-faith compliance usually takes time and doesn't end up including everything we might like it to for established, valid reasons.
Hell, the sheer volume of records that may apply to a request has increased considerably from the days when typewritten correspondence was the norm. Emails didn't used to be considered records for the purposes of FOIA; neither did information in databases. Staffing rarely matches need, and many of the people responsible for filling requests have other shit they need to get done.
Sure, government doesn't do everything you want in a 100% efficient way (that doesn't and can't exist). Most people still prefer it to anarchy.
The United States is a Republic....not a Democracy (a good thing mostly).
Well if GWB had paid half as much attention to the warnings he was given about terrorists and airliner-based attacks that he did to rumours of yellowcake in Iraq, 9/11 might not have happened.
The airplane-as-bomb strategy had already been dreamed up while Clinton was still in office. An attempt to try it in the Philippines was quietly quashed.
How about we finally get every bit of information about the JFK assassination with no redacted portions and from all investigations by all government agencies into the JFK, Bobby K. and Dr. King's murders. Everybody hold their breath and wait !
but from a regular human perspective it's hogwash!
Where is the majority of information concerning regular individuals kept?
Try to get an insurance, high chances are that you are asked for your SS-#, for what purpose?
In the US, there is one great feature: The whole population is indexed on one key - SS-# where there was one original purpose and its use has subsequently expanded to what it is now - the ultimate exploitation tool.
Try getting a company to disclose what data it has about you, something similar to a FOIA possibiliy available with US government. Seems you have no rights whatsoever and need to pay an attorney to get anything going in that directions.
Let's say you perceive something may be wrong and try to clear it up by asking for disclosure, what are your rights and what are the obligations of the other side? Looks like one needs to engage an attorney - pay those great hourly rates - and pray something will come out of it.
How about a basic consumer protection law putting the duty on the side storing those data?
Maybe it exists, dunno, sure feels quite outlandish something like that exists with all what is going on with this current political bribery scheme...
None of those compare with Buchanan, who basically created the situation which led to the Civil War. By his lack of leadership, and appeasement of the most militant of the slavery supporters, Buchanan made the Civil War inevitable.
There is reason to believe that Obama may have set us up for a second Civil War. Time will tell. I believe that historians of the distant future will consider Obama to be either the last President of the Constitutional Republic, or the first President of whatever they call our new government (which is no longer bound by the Constitution).
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
I doubt this bill is just about targeting Hillary et al. The people who are going to get hit with FOIA requests will be climatologists at NASA and NOAA. They're already compelled to release the raw data (which they do anyway), but now they'll be forced to fork over every single email they ever sent so that the the Senate Environmental Committee can continue its climate conspiracy witch hunt.
Leahy imagined a world 50 years in the future, when the next generation "will look back at this moment and gauge our commitment to the founding principles of our democracy."
Nothing against Patrick Leahy, but - I imagine when the next generation looks back at this era in American history, they'll see it as the moment when the government attempted to flush the "founding principles of our democracy" down the toilet.
#DeleteChrome
tl;dr: new law commands that new black markers with wider nibs be used so more FOIA requests can be redacted and released. Americans and the environment win big as the US moves to reduce the waste generated by billions of tiny markers.
Kennedy?
The requirement to provide the materials in an electronic format gets rid of the "send crates of printed pages" response to a FOIA request for government software, but I did not see a requirement or standard method to indicate where material had been redacted from the middle of information presented in electronic format.
Since the law includes no additional sanctions for federal agencies or officials who violate the FOIA, the impact of these changes will be negligible which is why the law passed in the first place.
I don't know how it works but sometimes it shows that a bill was passed by both the house and senate but not presented to the president for another few days or a week. So some of them have 2-3 weeks between passing and being signed. But anyway my point was that none of them (that I could see) were passed and signed within 5 days.
Bill Clinton held-off on many policies his liberal base wanted, like his clean water proposal (I'll get back to that in a moment...)
In his first term, he did not do a bunch of stuff so he could tell his base he needed to be re-elected to "get the job done" (Obama copied this play)
In his second term, he avoided the stuff his base wanted but which he and his team knew would be unlawful or unworkable or just plain bad policy because he did not want his administration tarred with the bad effects of those policies. Then, in the waning months of his second term, Clinton started pushing a bunch of the bad stuff safe in the knowledge that it would either be implemented by his successor and thus harm THAT administration, or that his successor would cancel the policy and then could be attacked for it.
Back to Bill Clinton's clean water example: Bill put in place a policy to force all the cities and towns in the country to purify the outflow from their sewage treatment plants to insanely high standards (in many towns, the water would have to be more pure than the well water the cities were pulling INTO their main water supply!) Remember: These standards NEVER applied during Bill's time in office. When the Bush administration came in and saw how much money many small towns would have to spend (and could not afford) and killed the policy (thereby leaving the water standards exactly where they had been through 8 years of Bill Clinton) the left immediately pounced and started loudly attacking Bush for wanting to poison the nation with lead and arsenic in the drinking water. (Note: this policy had NOTHING to do with the Flint,MI lead policy which was a failure by both Republicans and Democrats at the local, state, and federal levels to provide water even at the Clinton-era safety levels)
This story and legislation is a PR stunt. It lends to the "appearance" of you-can-actually-see-what-they-do. It is a lie.
A mother FUCKING lie straight up.
To tie it so heavy-handed to "50th anniversary of oh wow"... don't be misled sheep. Barack Obama is guilty of treason for immigration and money issues alone, let alone the buzzword "globalization" covering for actually misappropriating taxpayer funds. Just to service the debt the US bears right now is too much. Meaning: just the interest on the debt is overwhelming. Not all of the debt is disclosed nor is it possible to report because they refuse to print an M3 money supply report.
All lies. Spies and lies and dies.
OK. Thanks for the clarification.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Kennedy had the Cuba Crisis as his high point. Any of the dimwits today would've led us into a nuclear catastrophe.
He was a womanizer that makes Clinton look like a chaste saint, but being able to avoid a nuclear war kinda nixes that. Why should I give two shits about who he fucks as long as he keeps the country from getting fucked?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Meanwhile here in the UK. Ex-PM Tony Blair reckons that the watered down FOIA he implemented was the worst decision he made - and that includes the Iraq war - and the current incumbents are doing their best to water it down even further. They'd scrap it completely if they could but even the Daily Fascist^Mail would complain if they did.
Truman buckled in to Stalin about Europe, didn't really stop McCarthy's bullshit (that took Eisenhower to actually finally get rid of), kicked MacArthur out and generally fucked up Korea to the state it is today.
Sorry, but as much as I want to like him, he simply was a complete dud when it comes to foreign politics.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
He was a womanizer that makes Clinton look like a chaste saint
Yeah, well, he had better taste in his women than Clinton too, but his coke habit was nothing to sneeze at...