Emails: Insiders worried over political 'meddling'

By TED BRIDIS, Associated Press Mon Mar 28, 1:14 pm ET

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110328/ap_on_re_us/us_freedom_of_information/print

WASHINGTON – The Homeland Security Department official in charge of submitting 
sensitive government files to political advisers for secretive reviews before 
they could be released to citizens, journalists and watchdog groups complained 
in emails that the unusual scrutiny was "crazy" and hoped someone outside the 
Obama administration would discover the practice, The Associated Press has 
learned.

Chief Privacy Officer Mary Ellen Callahan, who was appointed by Homeland 
Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, complained in late 2009 that the vetting 
process was burdensome and said she wanted to change it, according to 
uncensored emails newly obtained by the AP. In the emails, she warned that the 
Homeland Security Department might be sued over delays the political reviews 
were causing, and she hinted that a reporter might find out about the vetting. 
The reviews are the subject of a congressional hearing later this week and an 
ongoing inquiry by the department's inspector general.

"This level of attention is CRAZY," Callahan wrote in December 2009 to her 
then-deputy, Catherine Papoi. Callahan said she hoped someone outside the Obama 
administration would discover details of the political reviews, possibly by 
asking for evidence of them under the Freedom of Information Act itself: "I 
really really want someone to FOIA this whole damn process," Callahan wrote.

Callahan is expected to be a central witness during an oversight hearing 
Thursday by the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee. Anticipating 
the hearing, the department announced internally Monday that any further 
political vetting of information requests will be completed within 24 hours. 
The congressional investigation into government transparency under President 
Barack Obama is among the earliest by Republicans since they won control of the 
House and targets one of the first pledges Obama made after he moved into the 
White House.

Less than one week after Callahan's email, on Dec. 21, the AP formally 
requested the records about the controversial political vetting. The agency 
ultimately turned over more than 995 pages of emails last summer, after a 
seven-month fight, and the AP wrote about the program. But the emails were 
heavily censored under a provision in the Freedom of Information Act allowing 
the government to withhold passages that describe internal policy-making 
deliberations.

The newly obtained versions of the same internal emails are not censored. They 
show that insiders described the unusual political vetting as "meddling," 
"nuts" and "bananas!" Together with other confidential emails obtained by the 
AP for the first time, the files reflect deep unease about the reviews and 
included allegations that Napolitano's senior political advisers might have 
hidden embarrassing or sensitive emails that journalists and watchdog groups 
had requested. The government said this didn't happen.

After an admitted al-Qaida operative tried to blow up a commercial airliner 
flying to Detroit on Christmas 2009, the AP asked for emails sent among 
Napolitano; her chief of staff, Noah Kroloff; deputy chief of staff Amy 
Shlossman; and four others. But the number of printed pages that Kroloff and 
Shlossman turned over to the FOIA unit was much less than what a computer 
search indicated should have existed, according to emails. The department said 
Monday that the disparity was an idiosyncrasy of how the computer searches were 
conducted and that no emails were hidden.

"I think we have an obligation to compare the hard copy emails to those pulled 
by the (chief information office) from the individuals' email accounts to 
determine why the discrepancy," Papoi wrote in May to Callahan.

Department spokeswoman Amy Kudwa said Monday that no emails were withheld by 
Napolitano's office, and no one complained that emails weren't turned over that 
should have been. The department said its electronically conducted searches 
distinguish each email within a conversation thread as a separate message, so 
the number of printed pages from such searches appears higher than when an 
employee manually prints emails from an inbox but the output is the same.

"At no point did anyone alert the office of the secretary or the office of the 
general counsel of concerns that responsive documents had not been submitted 
for review," Kudwa said in a statement. "Had any concerns been raised, 
appropriate steps would have been taken."

The Freedom of Information Act, the main tool forcing the government to be more 
transparent, is designed to be insulated from political considerations. Anyone 
who seeks information through the law is supposed to get it unless disclosure 
would hurt national security, violate personal privacy or expose confidential 
decision-making in certain areas. People can request government records without 
specifying why they want them and are not obligated to provide personal 
information about themselves other than their name and an address where the 
records should be sent.

But at the Homeland Security Department, since July 2009, career employees were 
ordered to provide political staffers with information about the people who 
asked for records — such as where they lived and whether they were private 
citizens or reporters — and about the organizations where they worked. If a 
member of Congress sought such documents, employees were told to specify 
Democrat or Republican. No one in government was allowed to discuss the 
political reviews with anyone whose information request was affected by them.

Papoi was replaced as deputy chief FOIA officer earlier this month by her new 
boss, Delores J. Barber, who took over Papoi's title and moved into Papoi's 
office. The Republican chairman of the House oversight committee, Rep. Darrell 
Issa of California, said that "appeared to be an act of retaliation." Issa 
identified Papoi as the employee who confidentially complained in March 2010 to 
the DHS inspector general about the political vetting of requests for 
government files. The department said Papoi, who is on leave, applied 
unsuccessfully for a new supervisory position ultimately awarded to Barber and 
that Papoi's salary was unaffected.

The emails also raise doubts about whether the emails previously released to 
the AP were properly censored. "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," Obama said shortly after he took office.

In a statement, Kudwa said, "Redaction decisions have always been made by FOIA 
professionals and career legal staff."

The government censored Callahan's email that described the "crazy" scrutiny by 
political advisers. It also censored another email by associate FOIA director 
William Holzerland, who told Callahan in September 2009 that the political 
reviews were "bananas!" Also censored were complaints by Papoi, the former 
deputy, that the political reviews were "meddling" and, together with "constant 
stonewalling" by the department's top lawyers, causing delays in the agency's 
open records department.

"I currently have 98 requests that are tagged by the front office for tracking 
and forwarding to the front office," Papoi wrote in one previously censored 
passage. "I simply don't have the time or staff to review all of those requests 
before we send them on. Quite honestly, we shouldn't have to."

The AP protested last year that the emails it received had been improperly 
censored, but the Homeland Security Department never responded to its formal 
appeal.

___

Online:

Censored copies of government emails: 
http://www.dhs.gov/xfoia/gc_1283193904791.shtm
_______________________________________________
Infowarrior mailing list
[email protected]
https://attrition.org/mailman/listinfo/infowarrior

Reply via email to