Journalists Tell Oversight Committee: Bureaucrats Make FOIA Process ‘Useless’
Members of a House oversight committee were outraged during a bizarre hearing Tuesday in which congressmen listened to journalists discuss how government agencies intentionally botched formal requests for information.
The reporters told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of numerous instances where agencies needlessly delayed, denied or redacted Freedom of Information Act requests. The FOIA guarantees the public access to all government documents, subject only to nine exemptions such as for privacy, commercial privilege and national security.
The journalists also suggested that government employees who violate the FOIA law should be prosecuted. There are currently no consequences to bureaucrats who don’t abide by the statute that has been on the books since 1966.
FOIA is a “pointless, useless shadow of its former self,” said former CBS investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson.
“Our role of objectively reporting the facts has been increasingly blocked,” said Newsweek Finance Editor Leah Goodman. “There is a motive for unresponsiveness and unaccountability.”
Committee chairman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, noted that President Obama promised at the outset of his first term that his administration would champion an unprecedented level of openness in the federal government.
Chaffetz held up an April 2009 memo that ordered agencies to allow the White House to review any requested documents that involved “White House equities.” There is no provision in the FOIA for the assertion of such a White House privilege.
“I don’t care who’s in the White House, it’s wrong, it’s wrong, it’s wrong,” Chaffetz shouted.
He blamed the memo for at least part of the government’s steadily growing backlog of unanswered and incomplete FOIA requests and responses.
New York Times Assistant General Counsel David McCraw noted that lawsuits are often an essential part of the FOIA process to force agencies to release documents.
“Last year, I filed eight FOIA lawsuits on behalf of The Times,” McCraw said. “Much of that litigation was driven not by actual disagreement about legal issues, but in response to unacceptable delay by agencies. Forcing requesters to litigate to get a response is a waste of resources.”
Attkisson said that agencies spend substantial amounts of taxpayer dollars on such lawsuits in their efforts to withhold information from the public.
Mark Meadows, R-N.C., noted that he knew of no FOIA officers that were fired for giving out too much information.
“There is no penalty to routinely violate the law,” said Vice investigative reporter Jason Leopold.
He and Attkisson both recommended that violators of FOIA law should face prosecution.
McCraw said the problem was an issue from the top down where agencies executives require FOIA officers to withhold as much information as possible.
“The leaders for many of those agencies are permitting staff to allow those deadlines to pass,” McCraw said. “This is a management problem.”
One way agencies often deter journalists seeking government documents is by simply ignoring their requests.
“Agencies take the 20 day time limit as a suggestion, rather than a rule,” Chaffetz said. Federal agencies are required to at least acknowledge receipt of FOIA requests within 20 business days of receiving them.
McCraw suggested that FOIA officers be required to communicate regularly with requesters and to provide status updates.
Newsweek’s Goodman shared with the committee a quip that is often repeated among journalists: “If you want to know what you’re writing about in three years, file a FOIA.”
Chaffetz also said that the exemptions to deny requests “are far narrower than agencies claim.”
The journalists noted that one exemption – (B)5, which lets agencies withhold documents if it was part of their decision-making process – has become the biggest FOIA headache for reporters.
“The use of that exemption has increased astronomically,” said Leopold.
The hearing will continue Wednesday at 9 a.m.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
EXCLUSIVE: House Committee Knows Of Hillary Email Server Whistleblower
EXCLUSIVE: House Committee Knows Of Hillary Email Server Whistleblower
The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform recently heard new information that could blow the lid off of the Hillary Clinton private email server scandal and shed new light on a consulting job Huma Abedin held while working as Clinton’s aide at the State Department.
The Daily Caller learned of a three-hour May 1 meeting two State Department whistleblowers held with the general counsel and staffers for the Oversight Committee, which is led by Utah Republican Jason Chaffetz.
According to a copy of notes from that meeting, State Department whistleblower Richard Higbie and another whistleblower told of an inspector-turned-whistleblower with State’s office of the inspector general who claims his investigation into Abedin’s work with Teneo Holdings, a consulting firm, led to the discovery of Clinton’s private email server.
According to the notes, the whistleblower also told Higbie that the investigation was shut down by Harold Geisel, the former acting inspector general for the State Department whose tenure was marked by accusations of political favoritism.
TheDC confirmed the May 1 meeting with both Higbie and the second whistleblower in attendance. Notes from the meeting were shared with TheDC on the condition that whistleblower with knowledge about Clinton’s server not be named. The Oversight Committee declined to comment, saying it doesn’t comment on matters involving whistleblowers.
According to the notes, the whistleblower in question “was the case agent on a criminal investigation pertaining to Huma Abedin and outside employment/income. The investigation involved the unlawful use of the clintonemail by Abedin to conceal their activity.”
While investigating Abedin’s gig with Teneo, a firm founded by former Bill Clinton adviser Doug Band, the inspector “identified the HRC email server and its use as part of his investigation. This developed into evidence implicating HRC,” according to the notes.
The whistleblower reportedly has his own notes and recordings to back his claims and says that the evidence shows that Clinton was “criminally culpable” to some degree.
The whistleblower could not provide more information to Higbie because of the non-disclosure agreement the State Department forced him to sign, according to the notes. The inspector still works for the agency, though in a different capacity. The whistleblower is willing to share his information if subpoenaed by Congress, the notes read.
Abedin’s arrangement with Teneo has been widely criticized for its appearance of a conflict of interest.
It was reported in May 2013, months after Clinton and Abedin left their posts, that the staffer failed to report income she earned while consulting for Teneo. Abedin was granted special government employee status to work at Teneo even as she work as an aide to Clinton.
While at State, both Clinton and Abedin used Clinton’s private email account, which was hosted at the domain clintonemail.com. Hillary used two addresses, HDR22@clintonemail.com and hrod17@clintonemail.com while Abedin, who is married to former New York U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner, reportedly used the email address huma@clintonemail.com. It is unclear how often Abedin might have used the Clinton email address. A trove of emails released last month by the State Department show that she did often use her official State Department email account, unlike Clinton.
According to the notes, the inspector told Higbie after initial reports surfaced in March about Clinton’s private server that “only half of the hard truth was out.”
Clinton’s server, which was registered to her Chappaqua, N.Y. residence, has been the subject of intense intrigue. Clinton and her team have been vague about its existence and about how it was set up. She has also refused to turn it over to both the State Department and to the House Select Committee on Benghazi. Her attorney, David Kendall, told that committee that the server has been wiped clean, though he did not specify when that occurred.
If the new whistleblower’s information pans out, it could pose a brand new headache for not just Clinton and Abedin but the State Department and its inspector general.
It was reported in April that State’s current inspector general, Steve Linick, informed Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley that his office was investigating Abedin’s past arrangement with Teneo.
In a letter to Grassley, stated that “based on my staff’s current knowledge, the OIG was not aware of Secretary Clinton’s and Ms. Abedin’s use of a private email system until recent media reports.”
Asked if former acting inspector general Geisel ever quashed an investigation into Clinton’s email server, a spokesman for the internal watchdog said that there was “no information to offer that would be responsive” to the inquiry.
No comments:
Post a Comment