11 of 27

Write now Article Tools

Page 2 of 2

should be done?
-
I believe that all of these issues can be addressed by a two-pronged approach: the Freedom of Information Act of 1966 already provides private citizens and organizations a way to request access to any information in the government's possession, and compels the requested agency to comply with that request or give one of a very few reasons why it will not. We as a country need an an honest and intelligent re-interpretation of this legislation and its use as a tool for providing information to people, not an excuse for not doing so. Further, the process by which documents and other data are "classified" needs to be opened to ensure that such data is locked up instead of hidden or buried, that only truly sensitive information is classified in the first place, and that material which is no longer sensitive is de-classified in a timely and efficient manner.

If government agencies are required to build and maintain information portals, then the very nature of the Web 2.0 concept is turned around, making what is essentially a user-driven experience into a "push" technology. Critics already complain that the government does not make its data available in the right form, if at all: why would they be satisfied with yet another government-provided solution? Where will offices already facing budget cuts and hiring freezes get the resources to build and deploy such systems? No, better to ensure that these agencies are willing and able to provide the raw data and let the users decide how to present and interpret it. Additional government spending is therefore kept to a minimum, no new agencies need to be created, and those who feel that they would most benefit from more (or more flexible) access to government data are free to acquire it and do with it what they please, including publish their results to the community.

As to the topic of classified data, I believe that a restructuring of the current process is in order. Ours is a branched government, with powers carefully separated and balanced, and this power should be no exception. I propose a committee comprised of sub-cabinet representatives from the Departments of State and Defense and representatives from each House of Congress. A super-majority or unanimous vote would be required to approve the classification of state secrets, with documents that failed to pass being returned to the public domain as soon as practicable. The same or a similar committee should be in charge of de-classifying documents, with a super-majority or unanimous rejection required to retain classification. De-classified material would also be returned to the public domain in a timely fashion, with a list of document titles and abstracts published regularly by the committee.

-
What's left?
-
There may be other issues that could or should fall under the heading of government transparency, but making existing data sets and documents available to the public is an important place to start. Doing this in a way that is itself transparent and accessible will do much to satisfy the public's growing appetite for information and its need to trust its government. Much has been lost, but that only means that there is much to be gained by opening the doors of our officials and agencies and putting the government back into the hands of the people.

Learn more about this author, Jack Rosdale.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

• << previous page
• 1
• 2

Add your voice

Know something about What do you think the Obama administration's priorities for transparent government should be??
We want to hear your view. Write now!