Government should have an affirmative legal obligation to disclose information to the public in a timely manner, thereby expanding the presumption of openness. Our national public access laws are relatively recent in our history. Until 1966, with passage of FOIA, there really was no law giving the public any right to government information. For all its usefulness, FOIA is not a true right-to-know law. FOIA puts government in a passive role; the law is not triggered unless there is a public request. Under a national right-to-know law, the approach would be reversed. Federal agencies would have an affirmative obligation to disclose information, the public a passive role to review and use it.
Agencies should be required to disclose newly collected electronic information holdings in a timely manner and justify in writing reasons for withholding information. Reasons for nondisclosure should be no more numerous than the current FOIA exemptions or responsibilities for national security classification.
While it can be argued that this will put federal agencies on an endless treadmill, spending all their time making information publicly accessible instead of doing the work of the people, the reality is that it is increasingly easy to make electronic information – in all its formats – publicly accessible. Moreover, as discussed throughout this report, a functioning democracy requires an informed and active citizenry, which can be accelerated through affirmative dissemination of government information. Thus, this law would cover all information holdings – from spending information to regulatory actions to enforcement actions to directories of federal employees to e-mails to audio and video collections.
- From the 21st Century RTK Agenda
Comments (2)
Starting from the presumption of disclosure changes the whole mindset -- we need to justify keeping something secret instead of justifying disclosure.
Surplus money: Google CAFR1 then you will see where the money is. also called The Biggest Game in Town.