Cloaking BARDA

There's a good AP story out today on the proposal to exempt an entire new government agency from the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).  We were among the first to call foul on anti-accountability aspects of the legislation (S. 1873) that creates the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Agency, or BARDA. 

A blanket FOIA exemption for an entire is unneeded, goes too far and is bad public policy that could backfire and lead to waste, fraud, abuse and slower scientific and medical progress from a lack of accountability and flow of information.  Furthermore, no other government agency has such an exemption, not even the CIA or other intelligence agencies.

Though some supporters of the FOIA exemption say the agency will still respond to FOIAs that don't threaten national security--there is already an exemption for that information.  Likewise, it is a false argument when supporters say the agency exemption is necessary because proprietary information could be released through FOIA since there is already an proprietary information exemption to FOIA.  In sum, FOIA already has exemptions for information that shouldn't be released. 

The two biggest problems with the BARDA legislation, sometimes refer to as Bioshield 2, are that, one, the language creates the impression that there will be a presumption of non-disclosure for things that could even be disclosed and, secondly, that there is no judicial review.  Mark Tapscott of the Heritage Foundation eloquently addresses the lack of judicial review problem in a recent op-ed.

The section of the bill that addresses FOIA and FACA is titled "Inapplicability of Certain Acts." The actual language on FOIA is as follows:

`(1) FACA- The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to the duties, activities, working groups, and advisory boards of the BARDA.

`(2) FOIA- Information that relates to the activities, working groups, and advisory boards of the BARDA shall not be subject to disclosure under section 552 of title 5, United States Code, unless the Secretary or Director determines that such disclosure would pose no threat to national security. Such a determination shall not be subject to judicial review.

Words and phrases such as "inapplicability" and "shall not be subject to disclosure" give the impression that transparency will be the exception, rather than the rule.  This could easily be changed by either removing this section entirely (remember FOIA already contains exemptions for information that should be withheld) or by inverting some of the language ("inapplicability" to "applicability" and "shall not be" to "shall be").

Cloaking an entire agency in secrecy sets a dangerous precedent which could lead to ever greater secrecy across the government.

Comments

[Posted on: Feb 08, 2007 at 11:09 AM]

BARDA A "DESIGNED TO HARM" OF OUR LOVED ONES?
2/8/07

In 2007 now continued by the 2006 established Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA)?[7] Under the "NATIONAL SECURITY MISSIONS" of BARDA continued in 2007 is the advancement of the SHAD R&D lessons learned? BARDA also lacks the MILITARY Shipboard Hazard and Defense (SHAD) oversight and accountability for their CIVILIAN biological contamination. One of the starting in 1962 DOD Project 112 chemical and biological experiments.[3] BARDA too, as most conducted on "hundreds of thousands", will be under the cover of our nation's wars.

The 1950 U.S. Supreme Court Feres decision stopped claims against the federal government for injuries arising from or incident to military service.[1] Documented by the 1994 U.S. Senate Report over the same time period is a from 1944 study.[6] This is their, under the cover of our nations wars, 50 years of conducted on "hundreds of thousands" Department Of Defense (DOD) "experiments that were designed to harm"! Its NOTES (No.'s 72, 168 & 169) cite, "The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code, Human Rights in Human Experimentation". Not addressed is their own Report's many conducted in direct disobedience of the DOD Secretary's 1953 order; "The Nazi Doctors" pages 343-345.[2] The 1987 U.S. SUPREME COURT in the 1958 order disobeyed STANLEY Case makes very clear that UNLESS CONGRESS CHANGES IT, BY REASON OF MILITARY SERVICE AFTERWARDS VETERAN'S LOST ARE PRIOR TO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.[4] The Report noted that rights be restored. To-date not done!! All for the greater good, end justifies the means! The excuse for an in 2007 from 1944 ongoing 63 years of JUSTICE AND TREATMENT DENIED for "hundreds of thousands"![6]

These DOD human experiments demonstrate Research and Development (R&D) protocol by both military and BARDA agencies. First, all prior R&D is reviewed. The resulting Scope of Work defines what each research program is to accomplish. The where, how, when and who is involved is spelled out. Each "designed to harm" project's cause and effects are closely followed and recorded. Developed is the specific needed treatment and from "harm" protection. This crucial human "experiments...designed to harm" revealing evidence is not part of a subject's medical history. Therefore, unavailable for an ongoing 63 years of past, present and future victim's diagnosis and treatment by: 1. Health Maintenance Organization Physicians'. 2. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Physicians'. And 3. For use during any VA and Judicial Branch processes! The 12 July 1973 National Personnel Records Center fire destroyed "designed to harm" military service records. Congress's 1974 Privacy Act censored the names of all witnesses from surviving and future records. "The court may not review the schedule of ratings for disabilities or the policies underlying the schedule." The Chief Judge's statement during 17 & 18 Oct. 1994.[5] Which is the "schedule" withheld R&D evidence and the underlying "experiments...designed to harm" policies? His severely restricted 12/18/88 established ‘no teeth' Veterans Court is Congress's oversight and accountability response to the 6/25/87 STANLEY.

THEREBY, THE VICTIM NEVER THE WISER BECOMES! AN AFTER SERVICE AND "NATIONAL SECURITY MISSIONS" MISSED MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS. CREATED ARE INCREASED SERIOUS AND CHRONIC INJURIES!

In 2007 is the H. R. 4259 "To establish the Veterans' Right to Know Commission." [8] A proposal to study the DOD's SHAD lack of oversight and "Right to Know" "designed to harm" accountability?

Requested is your support by contacting your members in the U.S. Congress. Please have them return to Veterans' their Constitutional Rights with oversight and "designed to harm" accountability for everyone! Thank you.

REFERENCES:

[1] Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135, 146 (1950)

[2] DOD Secretary's 26 February 1953 NO non-consensual, human experiments Memo pages 343-345. George J. Annas and Michael A. Grodin, "The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code; Human Rights in Human Experimentation" (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992). In REFERENCE 6 as NOTES 72, 168 & 169.

[3] "Project 112 (Including Project SHAD) Home"; www1.va.gov/ shad/ Starting in 1962 chemical and biological experiments.

[4] U.S. SUPREME COURT, JUNE 25, 1987, U.S. V. STANLEY, 107 S. CT. 3054 (VOLUME 483 U.S., SECTION 669, PAGES 699 TO 710). In REFERENCE 6 cited in NOTE 169.

[5] Chief Judge and colleague statements, Court of Veterans Appeals, Annual Judicial Conference, Fort Meyer, VA., 17 & 18 October 1994. www.goodnet. com/~heads/ nebeker.html

[6] December 8, 1994 REPORT 103-97 "Is Military Research Hazardous to Veterans' Health? Lessons Spanning Half a Century." Hearings Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, 103rd Congress 2nd Session. With NOTES 1 to 170.

[7] Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), Bill S. 3678 2006.

[8] H. R. 4259 "To establish the Veterans' Right to Know Commission."

[Posted on: Jan 12, 2007 at 10:10 AM]

Is it too late to stop this legislation?

If not too late- who do we need to email or fax ?

[Posted on: Sep 08, 2006 at 04:57 PM]

If you do a little spelunking, you will find that Homeland Security was originally planned during the CLINTON administration. The wheels were set in motion some time ago.

[Posted on: Apr 25, 2006 at 05:43 AM]

Am I nieve? Google "conplan 0400", or if you're lazy and unable to comprehend government syntax, google "granite shadow." There is an extremely interesting bit in this "military drill to enact marshal law" about how our wonderful military could set up quarantine sectors wherever it was deemed necassary. Marshal law is utterly unconstitutional, and the fact that our own government would blatantly plan, and in plain sight practice something so bold shows you it cannot be given any more power. This is not a bit surprising based on other legislation recently passed and unreviewed. BARDA is a means for this. Have you no critical thinking skills? We tested agent orange on US soil... one of the most toxic PCB's ever created, and of course ingested by you daily, based on the principles of bio-accumulation. Maybe they don't check aunt Martha's phone conversations. What if aunt Martha's neighbor's phone is tapped. Instead of having to wade through those pesky 4th through 8th ammendmants, perhaps BARDA could "research" (unleash) a virus on aunt Martha's city to get rid of a maybe-sort-of-kind-of-threat. (Those damn American citizens and there rights. If it were another country the spooks could have caught it.) Call me crazy, but when an FBI agent likens guantanamo bay to a concentration camp, it's time to check and balance. This all may sound a bit extreme, but just remember; The CIA trained the terrorists you are so afraid of. Now do some research and figure out which man responsible for Bin Laden was appointed to a cushy homeland (doesn't "homeland" remind you of "fatherland?" wierd. Well considering bush's grand fathers helped found the Union Banking Company which helped to launder Nazi moneys... no that's just about right. Anyway, I digress.) security job. I leave you with some drunken words that helped to catylize the birth of a nation. "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."

[Posted on: Dec 20, 2005 at 03:05 AM]

Are you nieve enough to assume while we are at war, there is no need for our government to be able to check on people without the normal checks and balances.
I believe they are not going to check your aunt Marthas' phone conversations as against possible terrorists.
We need this ability to fight terrorism.