Secrecy hides accountability

Secrecy hides accountability
Tue Mar 14, 6:56 AM ET

In the movies, government confidentiality is typically depicted by documents stamped "Top Secret." In real life, much of what's kept under wraps has little or nothing to do with national security or the war on terror.

Instead, it can involve muzzling critics, covering up corruption and incompetence, or simply mindless bureaucracy. Phone numbers, policy papers, contracting details, historical documents, whistle-blower allegations - they're all disappearing from public view. By one estimate, government papers are being classified at the rate of 125 a minute.

To those in power, keeping facts hidden makes life easier; the probability of oversight drops. But those who believe the sunshine of disclosure makes democracy stronger are denied the tools of accountability.

Examples abound:

Environmental secrecy Like virtually all top climate experts, NASA's James Hansen thinks global warming is an urgent problem.

But Hansen's view doesn't line up with the White House's wait-and-see position. Recently, NASA's public affairs officials leaned on him to curtail media contacts and speeches. His message is one they'd rather not hear discussed.

Fortunately for Hansen, his high profile insulated him from dismissal or other retribution. "We live in a free country and work for the taxpayer," he told The New York Times last month. "We should provide useful information, not propaganda." For scientists with a lower profile, though, speaking out against the party line can endanger their job security.

Another environmental secrecy debate has emerged over the collapse of the World Trade Center towers on 9/11. It's likely that federal officials downplayed the impact of toxic gases, a federal judge concluded recently as she allowed a lawsuit to proceed against former Environmental Protection Agency administrator Christine Whitman. Residents moved back into the lower Manhattan area after the EPA assured them there was no risk from pollutants such as asbestos dust.

Many of the federal advisory committees - established to provide unvarnished scientific and technical advice to government - meet in secret. Nearly two-thirds of the more than 7,000 meetings in 2004 were closed to the public. It's hard to see special interests at work when the doors are closed.

Contracting secrecy Each year, the government hands out about $300 billion in contracts. Yet there's no requirement that it collect and publish information on criminal, civil and administrative actions involving contractors. Industry lobbyists for the largest contractors have no trouble foiling efforts by shoestring-budget public interest groups to force the government to reveal those details.

What doesn't get published doesn't get reviewed. For instance, important details about reconstruction contracts in Iraq and the Gulf Coast never make it into public view.

Companies winning work despite having skeletons in their closets need not worry about exposure. The "administrative agreements" and waivers that government agencies routinely issue to contractors neatly cover those up: They're secret.

Secrecy for the sake of secrecy. This is the most perplexing and insidious of all the secrecy excesses. Recently, scholars researching history lessons involving the Korean and Vietnam wars noticed that documents once available had disappeared. Half-century-old intelligence analysis from the Korean War, for example, went from open files to closed ones.

A program to reclassify declassified documents at the National Archives began nearly seven years ago - the result of a backlash from intelligence officials who believed the declassifying had gone too far. But much of that program, involving as many as 55,000 pages, appears to involve documents of interest only to historians.

The irony of secrecy for the sake of secrecy is that it can make the nation less safe. Thomas Kean, the former New Jersey governor who co-chaired the 9/11 Commission, said lack of communication among government agencies, which ranged from senseless turf wars to legal impediments, hindered efforts to uncover the 9/11 plots.

As a symbolic gesture, the commission suggested, the government should start releasing the budgets of the nation's intelligence agencies. Terrorists aren't likely to care whether the number is $20 billion or $30 billion. But taxpayers deserve to find out whether their money is being well-spent.

Open government isn't about partisan politics or journalists' rights. It's about your right to know what your government is doing with your money. Especially when national security is not involved, secrecy should be the rare exception, not the rule.

Copyright © 2006 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.