After President Obama’s criticisms of transparency under the Bush administration, he created Freedom of Information Act guidelines that were supposed to “usher in a new era of open government.” His administration was going to work “in a spirit of cooperation,” and “unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles” would be removed.
Unfortunately, his administration is quickly becoming more secretive than Bush’s ever was.
In documents returned from requests, more information is blacked out (often incorrectly or illegally), and there are far more flat-out denials. The Bush administration might have taken months or even years to respond to a FOIA request, but the Obama administration is more likely to just say no, or claim that it is incapable of even finding records.
Take the Department of Housing and Urban Development. In five separate requests, HUD said its records system was so unorganized finding anything was impossible. One FOIA officer even claimed that she had never heard of ACORN, even though HUD has been responsible for giving the organization millions of dollars in grants.
The Obama administration is also very fond of stonewalling. In a request to the Department of Justice regarding Attorney General Eric Holder’s investigation of Dick Cheney and detainee abuse, DOJ closed the request by claiming it was too broad.
The request was extremely specific. Also, agencies are supposed to ask for clarification instead of just saying no.
When a request is filed, the agency in question has 20 days to respond, or else get sued. But by flat-out denying a request, it effectively stops the clock.
Since Obama took office, Judicial Watch has submitted 245 FOIA requests to the administration. Only 42 cases have resulted in the production of documents.
White House involvement in FOIA has also drastically increased under Obama. Under the Bush administration, release of records was controlled by the agency that possessed them, with little or no involvement from the White House.
Agencies must now consult with Obama’s counsel before releasing any records involving the White House. This not only slows down the process, but gives the White House much more power in what information is made public.
Instead of making FOIA more efficient, the administration has created information Web sites like HealthReform.gov and Recovery.gov. While these Web sites are useful, they will never replace FOIA.
Why? Well, all of the information on the sites is carefully selected, edited and controlled by the administration. The data does not contain the detail that can be obtained using FOIA, yet the White House treats it as a substitute.
These sites make it easier for government to claim that it is so transparent there is no longer any need for FOIA. This scenario would be similar to receiving a bonus at work but losing the ability to ask for a raise ever again.
No matter how transparent government becomes (and it will take a lot more than a few bailout graphs for the Obama administration to become even close to transparent), FOIA is still the only legally protected tool the public has to obtain information from the government.
Perhaps the best example of transparency under Obama is this: When the new FOIA guidelines were issued, DOJ also announced a conference addressing how the guidelines would “establish a new era of open government.”
That conference was closed to the public.
Obama’s treatment of FOIA is disappointing, but not surprising. Despite his claims, the only thing Obama has done when it comes to FOIA is create more hurdles and red tape. It’s hard to imagine, but we were better off under Bush.
Tegan Millspaw is a FOIA program manager at Judicial Watch.
