Obama: Transparently Disappointing

The president has fallen far short of promises to establish “an unprecedented level of openness in government.”

(Page 2 of 3)

In at least two documented incidents, Papoi’s instructions came not from her supervisor in the DHS FOIA office, which is structured to be apolitical, but from a former volunteer for the campaign organization Obama for America named Willard Carte, who had been hired as a “confidential assistant” to Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano. DHS Inspector General Charles K. Edwards, who conducted an investigation into these claims concurrent with the Oversight Committee’s, concluded that Napolitano’s role marked an “unprecedented involvement in the FOIA process.”

You could claim, as some Democrats did, that the incidents Issa’s team uncovered were isolated. You could also argue, as Obama defenders have, that the culture of the federal bureaucracy cannot change overnight, even in response to an executive memo. 

But other decisions from early in Obama’s presidency show the ways in which this administration has actively worked to preserve Bush-era secrecy. The Risen subpoena, for instance, was entirely the Obama administration’s doing. Risen published the classified information he obtained from Sterling in 2006; the Justice Department subpoenaed him in May 2011. In reporting that Risen had been asked to testify against Sterling, the Times also noted that “in President Obama’s 26 months in office, civilian and military prosecutors have charged five people in cases involving leaking information, more than all previous presidents combined.”

And what about FOIA policy, the battles for which are fought largely in the trenches of agencies, and not the White House? Even on that front, the Obama administration has chosen opacity over transparency time and time again.

Milner v. Department of the Navy dates back to 2003, when Glen Milner, a resident of Puget Sound, Washington, filed a FOIA request for the explosives safety quantity distance (ESQD) of the munitions stored at the naval magazine on nearby Indian Island. The ESQD indicates how a series of munitions explosions would affect the surrounding area, including Milner’s own neighborhood. The Navy had shared this information with first responders in Puget Sound but refused to release documents to Milner on the grounds that “disclosure would threaten the security of the base and surrounding community.” Instead of using one of FOIA’s many national security exemptions, the Navy cited Exemption 2, which covers information “related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency.” 

Over time, broader and broader interpretations of Exemption 2 have turned it into a rejection of last resort: If an agency can’t deny a request on legitimate grounds, it will often cite the ambiguously worded exemption to avoid releasing information. An amicus brief in the Milner case signed by more than a dozen news agencies warned that the exemption “has been distorted to such a disturbing extent that agencies consistently cite Exemption 2 to withhold any document that could potentially fall into the ‘wrong hands.’ ” The use of this tactic was so out of control by the time Obama took office that Holder’s Department of Justice (DOJ) issued guidelines to limit it. 

Yet when Milner’s case went before the Supreme Court in December 2010, Obama administration lawyers fought to preserve to the broadest possible reading of Exemption 2. Assistant Solicitor General Anthony Yang asked the Court not to “disrupt 30 years of FOIA practice by rejecting an interpretation of Exemption 2 that has prevailed and has provided a workable standard for agencies.”

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts would not have it. “You are telling us how sensitive these [documents] are, and therefore it would harm the national interest if they have to be disclosed,” Roberts said to Yang during oral argument. “If that’s true, you can classify them…instead of coming to us and saying you should torture the language in FOIA.” In March 2011, the Court ruled in favor of Milner, 8 to 1.

That same month, and just one week before Obama received his transparency award, the Justice Department released its proposal for a FOIA rule change. Current FOIA policy allows agencies to respond in cases involving certain kinds of sensitive information by claiming that the existence of requested records could be neither confirmed nor denied but that if they did exist they would be covered by such-and-such exemption. The new policy submitted by Holder’s Justice Department would allow federal agencies to “respond to the request as if the excluded records did not exist.” The DOJ withdrew the proposal a year later in response to public outrage.

‘Co-opted by the National Security Community’

Under Obama, transparency groups have received unprecedented rhetorical support from the White House. As a result, they are understandably reluctant to open fire on the president and have him abandon their cause altogether. As the Project on Government Oversight’s Danielle Brian wrote on her organization’s blog just after Obama’s transparency award, “If we take for granted a sitting President who has used his bully pulpit to emphasize the need to change the way we think about access to government information, our cause is likely to be forgotten among the many other presidential priorities. And some progress has undeniably been made in the past two years.”

Other organizations are less cagey. On June 14, 2011, a group led by anti-war activist David Swanson published an open letter in the London Guardian calling for the award to be rescinded. “If the ceremony had been open to the press,” the letter said, “it is likely that reporters would have questioned the organisations’ proffered justification for the award, in contrast to the current reality.” Signatories included former American intelligence analysts, former high-ranking DOJ officials, and retired military officers as well as dozens of watchdog groups and international nongovernmental organizations.

Citing data provided by the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO), an arm of the National Archives and Records Administration that tracks the cost and scope of classification, Swanson et al. reported that “the cost of classification for 2010 has reached over $10.17 billion. That’s a 15 percent jump from the previous year, and the first time ever that secrecy costs have surpassed $10 billion. Last month, ISOO reported that the number of original classification decisions generated by the Obama administration in 2010 was 224,734—a 22.6 percent jump from the previous year.”

In 2011 the reported cost of classifying government information jumped again, to $11.36 billion, though the true cost is higher, since the ISOO’s figures do not include spending by the CIA and the NSA. These cost hikes suggest that Obama reneged on yet another of his transparency promises, made on December 29, 2009. Executive Order 13526 held that “information shall not be considered for classification unless its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause identifiable or describable damage to the national security.”

The Swanson group also cited Obama’s invocation of the state secrets privilege to block lawsuits over the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping program; his April 2011 statement that suspected Wikileaks accomplice Bradley Manning “broke the law” (made long before Manning saw the inside of a courtroom); the Defense Department’s confiscation and destruction of Operation Dark Heart, a book by U.S. Army intelligence officer Lt. Col Anthony Shaffer that shed light on American failures in Afghanistan, on the grounds that it contained “sensitive” information; subpoenas and indictments of journalists such as Risen, and FBI translator Shamai Leibowitz, who shared transcripts from the FBI’s wiretaps of the Israeli Embassy with blogger Richard Silverstein; and the lengths to which administration officials have gone to keep the names of lobbyists off the White House visitor logs. (Administration officials meet with them in coffee houses, and correspond with them from personal email accounts).

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • sarcasmic||


  • ||

    Too bad - there was a lot of substance here.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    And damned depressing substance too.

  • ||


  • H. Reardon||

    Just pretend it's the comments section to AM Links. You can do it!

  • Government Hack||

    Actually, it was surprisingly informative. And depressing. Very depressing.

    Why is everything I read these days depressing? Does our world suck that much?

  • Tim||

    He looks like black spock pushing up his eyebrow like that.

  • Hyperion||

    But Spocks ears were way cooler than those dumbo ears of the Bamster. Also, Spock didn't have purple lips. Spock also had the Vulcan death grip. The Bamster only has a teleprompter and his side kick Opie.

    So, Spock is way more cool than the Bamster.

  • ||

    Dude, don't insult Tim Russ by comparing Obama to him.

  • Hyperion||

    Transparency the Chicago way. You see sumpthin? I didn't see nuthin. That's what I thought. Carry on.

  • ||

    Wait, a politician lied? Next thing you'll tell me there's gambling in this casino!

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Will he pick up his Nobel prize for physics himself, or will he be too busy healing the Jersey Shore and bringing back the Dodo?

  • Libertymike||

    The promises of greater transparency should embrace full disclosure of college applications, letters of admission, transcripts and the like.

    Given that Obama supports affirmative action, why the reluctance to release information that proves that he was a beneficiary of the same?

  • H. Reardon||

    Just pretend it's the comments section to AM Links. You can do it!

  • H. Reardon||


  • R C Dean||

    No, no double posts are totally par for the AM links.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Let me preempt the TEAM BLUE cheerleaders ... *ahem*


    Thank you. please continue.

  • Loki||

    Seth Borenstein, a writer for the Associated Press, introduced the representative from the Obama administration. “You’ll notice that it is an empty chair,” Borenstein said.

    So that's where Clint Eastwood got the idea. And I thought he was being so original.

  • Sevo||

    According to Eastwood, it was a last-minute epiphany just before he started the talk.
    Personally, I think both applications of the 'empty seat' were appropriate; an empty suit even more so.

  • dunkel||

    They're so transparent, you can't see what they're hiding.

  • joey89924||

    The important issue of transparency in government is such a high priority for the new administration.

  • ||

    Yep transparent, just like that emperor and his fun new clothes

  • Crazyotto||

    As Obama said "Brawndo has what plants crave.. it has electrolytes"

  • Catherine Fitzpatrick||

    I'm glad you went to all the trouble to so carefully investigate and document all these cases of disappointment in Obama's "transparency". I didn't know about some of them. It seems as if the entire Gov 2.0 has been a flop, or at least its superficial successes have covered up these more serious problems.

    What I wonder is whether this reticence is related to WikiLeaks? Is it a post-WikiLeaks contraction? Assanges stated goal as an anarchist was to get the liberal state to retract and behave unlike its nature, and become also confused without exchange of information as it retreated into silos, and then fail or at least become discredited. Did he succeed in his mission?

    I think there are more ideological reasons for what happened with Obama and some of his Administration people and friends who have a past in cadre organizations on the left. I think they have no intention of ever becoming opening because I think they are devoted to bureaucratic centralism or "democratic centralism" and perhaps not even that.

    It's also important to note the Big Data related to the elections which Obama For America is sitting on and which may never find its way to the DNC for the next candidate.


  • nikea||

    Today, Columbus boasts more than 70 buildings http://www.drdrebeatsbydreau.com/ designed by internationally celebrated architects like I.M. Pei, Eliel Saarinen, Eero Saarinen, Richard Meier and http://www.nikefootballcleatstrade.com/ Harry Weese.

  • nikea||

    The memo went on to say that FOIA, which is the primary legal means by which citizens can petition the federal government to cough up information, “should be administered with a clear presumption: In the face of doubt, openness prevails. The Government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears. Nondisclosure http://www.cheapfootballcleatsairs.com/ should never be based on an effort to protect the personal interests of Government officials at the expense of those they are supposed to serve.”

  • nikea||

    We have been combing through classified and unclassified documents and have tough questions about State Department threat assessments and decision-making on Benghazi. This requires a public http://www.cheapbeatsbydreonau.com/ appearance by the Secretary of State herself.

  • zhonga||

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Two years after a hostage video and photographs of retired FBI agent Robert Levinson raised the possibility that the missing American was being held by terrorists, U.S. officials now see the cheapbeatsbydretradeau.com government of Iran behind the images, intelligence officials told The Associated Press.

  • zhonga||

    The extraordinary photos — showing Levinson's hair wild and gray, his beard long and unkempt — are being seen for the first time publicly after the http://www.cheapbeatsbydretradeau.com/ family provided copies to the AP. The video has been previously released.

  • cinsel chat||

    good thanks sohbet
    cinsel sohbet

  • LifeStrategies||

    Obama talks a good line, he usually sounds convincing even when what he's saying is totally at variance with the facts.

    I wonder when he'll realize that his enormous stress is inevitable since he knows inside that his mendacity is so misaligned with the truth... see http://www.lifestrategies.net/truth


Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.