The Age of Missing Information
The Bush administration's campaign against openness.
By Steven Aftergood
Posted Thursday, March 17, 2005, at 4:23 AM PT
http://slate.msn.com/id/2114963/fr/rss/

The government does a remarkable job of counting the number of national
security secrets it generates each year. Since President George W. Bush
entered office, the pace of classification activity has increased by 75
percent, said William Leonard in March 2 congressional testimony. His
Information Security Oversight Office oversees the classification system and
recorded a rise from 9 million classification actions in fiscal year 2001 to
16 million in fiscal year 2004.

Yet an even more aggressive form of government information control has gone
unenumerated and often unrecognized in the Bush era, as government agencies
have restricted access to unclassified information in libraries, archives,
Web sites, and official databases. Once freely available, a growing number
of these sources are now barred to the public as "sensitive but
unclassified" or "for official use only." Less of a goal-directed policy
than a bureaucratic reflex, the widespread clampdown on formerly public
information reflects a largely inarticulate concern about "security." It
also accords neatly with the Bush administration's preference for unchecked
executive authority.

No comprehensive catalog of deleted information exists, which is part of the
problem. What follows is a representative selection of categories of data
that have been withdrawn from public access in the Bush years, with
reflections on what they mean.

Department of Defense Telephone Directory. The Pentagon phone book is a
useful tool for reporters, students of defense policy, or others who might
wish to contact the Pentagon or gauge the size and shape of the bureaucracy.
Anyone could buy it at the Government Printing Office Bookstore until 2001,
when it was marked "for official use only." A GPO Bookstore notice advises
that it is no longer for sale to the public.

Questioned about the change, a Defense Department official spoke vaguely of
"security concerns." This is hard to swallow, since other agencies have
failed to follow suit. The Department of Energy, for example, handles
information and materials as sensitive as any in government, and it
publishes its telephone and e-mail directory on its Web site. Why was this
new wall erected between the public and its government?

Los Alamos Technical Report Library. In 2002, the Los Alamos National
Laboratory removed from public access its unclassified technical report
library, which contained thousands of unclassified Los Alamos technical
reports written over a half century. Many are highly specialized studies,
comprehensible only to experts. In some cases, although unclassified, they
bear directly and uncomfortably on the technologies of nuclear weapons
production. But most of them are fundamental studies of materials science,
metallurgy, physics, and engineering pursued by the lab over decades.

While a selective re-evaluation and withdrawal of individual reports might
have been warranted on nonproliferation grounds, Los Alamos elected to
remove them all. "The resource you are requesting is not offered to the
public," says a Web notice. An index of many of the withdrawn reports, and
some of the reports themselves, are available from the Federation of
American Scientists.

Historical Records at the National Archives. Worried that sensitive
information may have been improperly declassified in the late 1990s,
government agencies took to scrubbing public records at the National
Archives and elsewhere, pulling untold thousands of public records for
"review" and possible reclassification. Many 30- or 50-year-old archival
collections are a shadow of what they were just a few years ago.

On a recent visit to the National Archives, American University historian
Anna Nelson recalled, "I found four boxes of Nixon documents full of nothing
but withdrawal cards," signifying records that had been removed. In another
collection of Johnson records concerning the 1965 intervention in the
Dominican Republic, "I found a box of 55 withdrawal cards."

Not all archive withdrawals are unwarranted. For instance, documents
containing classified nuclear-weapons design information were discovered in
otherwise declassified records collections, as this recent DOE report on
inadvertent disclosures indicates. But the scope of current withdrawals goes
beyond what's necessary and poses arbitrary obstacles to historical
research.

"Orbital Elements" and Launch Dates. The U.S. Air Force records the orbits
of Earth satellites in its "orbital elements" database. For nearly 20 years,
it has made the database available to the public through NASA. But beginning
at the end of this month, it will be subject to new government restrictions
on distribution, including restrictions on any analysis of the underlying
data.

"This is a crisis," wrote David Finkleman in a letter to Space News earlier
this year with pardonable hyperbole. The new policy, he explained, "could
... impair international efforts to mitigate space debris and prohibit all
who use DoD space surveillance data in their research from discussing or
publishing their work without the approval of the Office of the Secretary of
Defense."

And for what? The current policy "has operated for decades without ever
compromising national security."

Most recently, the tide of space-related secrecy has even swept over the
launch schedule for unclassified Air Force missions. As reported by Janene
Scully in the Santa Maria Times on March 13, "Vandenberg's unclassified
schedule Web site has evolved from giving detailed information such as
launch dates and liftoff times to more recently revealing only the month for
a mission. Now even that is gone."

The Military Retreat from the Web. Beginning in 2001, the U.S. Army began
moving online content from public Web sites to a password-protected portal
called Army Knowledge Online. Untold thousands of documents, from policy
directives and regulations to newsletters to after-action reports and all
kinds of other records�all unclassified�disappeared from public view.

Since there is no reliable inventory of what's been removed, the loss to
democratic oversight of defense policy is incalculable. Last year, the Air
Force followed the Army lead, disabling numerous formerly public Air Force
Web sites and moving data to a restricted portal. A U.S. Air Force official
presented the change as a public service to Inside the Air Force. "By
removing redundant, confusing, or inappropriate information available to the
public, the [Air Force] will deliver a more consistent and coherent message
to the public."

Energy Department Intelligence Budget. The budget of the tiny Office of
Intelligence in the Department of Energy had been unclassified for as long
as anyone can remember, and certainly for more than a decade. In fiscal year
2004 it was $39.8 million dollars, about one tenth of a percent of the
estimated $40 billion that the U.S. now spends on intelligence.

But in 2004, DOE categorized the amount requested and appropriated for its
intelligence program as classified information, because its disclosure
"could reasonably be expected to cause damage to national security."

This is an ironic move, considering that budget information is one of the
only two categories of government information to which the public has an
explicit constitutional claim (the other is the Journal of Congress).
Moreover, the publication of intelligence-agency budgets was one of the 41
recommendations proposed by the 9/11 commission as a means of combating the
excessive secrecy that has undermined the performance and the accountability
of U.S. intelligence agencies.

No official explanation for the change is forthcoming, beyond the national
security claim. One department official said that the classification action
was taken at the request of the Central Intelligence Agency, which found
DOE's unclassified intelligence budget inconsistent with its position that
no such budget information should ever be disclosed.

Aeronautical Maps and Data. Last November, the National
Geospatial-Intelligence Agency publicly announced its intent to halt
distribution of a series of aeronautical maps and other publications that
had long been available to the public. The proposal, based partly on
security grounds and partly on intellectual property claims, immediately
drew respectful protest.

Librarians, environmentalists, and others complained to the NGA�a defense
agency that is part of the U.S. intelligence community�that these maps and
publications are now part of their professional toolkit as well and would be
sorely missed. Biologists used them in the mapping of species distribution.
Engineering firms used them in construction projects. While too specialized
to be missed by the general public, this data contributes to the public
well-being.

The list of government records removed from public access during the Bush
administration goes on and on, and includes environmental data from
Environmental Protection Agency reading rooms, various unclassified records
on the safety of chemical and nuclear plants, and other infrastructure data.
This purge reverses the "openness initiatives" of the previous
administration during which government Web sites emerged by the thousands
and nearly a billion pages of historically valuable records were
declassified.

The information blackout may serve the short-term interests of the present
administration, which is allergic to criticism or even to probing questions.
But it is a disservice to the country. Worst of all, the Bush
administration's information policies are conditioning Americans to lower
their expectations of government accountability and to doubt their own
ability to challenge their political leaders.

Information is the oxygen of democracy. Day by day, the Bush administration
is cutting off the supply.

Steven Aftergood is director of the project on government secrecy at the
Federation of American Scientists, where he writes the Secrecy News
newsletter.



You are a subscribed member of the infowarrior list. Visit
www.infowarrior.org for list information or to unsubscribe. This message
may be redistributed freely in its entirety. Any and all copyrights
appearing in list messages are maintained by their respective owners.

Reply via email to