The Project On Government Oversight (POGO) Blog

Reporters vulnerable

In relation to the illegal outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame, the Washington Post covers the issue of "shield laws" for reporters and their confidential sources.  Two journalists from Time magazine and the New York Times are facing up to 18 months of jail time for refusing to testify, thereby protecting their sources--even though neither of those two reporters outed Plame:

The basic argument in favor of legal protection for a reporter's pledge of confidentiality is that the public interest is served by making sure that whistle-blowers can take their tales of official wrongdoing to the news media without fear of reprisal.

In 49 of the 50 states, plus the District, that argument has carried the day, and a reporter's privilege of some kind has been recognized either by a "shield law" or by a court decision. ...

However, the counterargument is that reporters, no less than other citizens, have a duty to tell the authorities about criminal conduct they may have witnessed.

And that persuaded five members of the Supreme Court when it ruled in 1972, in Branzburg v. Hayes, that the First Amendment does not protect journalists from being subpoenaed by a federal grand jury.

Although it's unlikely to become law Senator Christopher J. Dodd (D-Connecticut) has drafted a federal reporter shield law bill.  But it's needed.  Sources with crucial public interest information might not come forward if they know reporters will be forced to reveal their identities. 

However, these cases are interesting, in the sense that, as David Rudenstine, dean of the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law said:

".. here the sources that are at stake represent the government using its power to punish the leaker. . . . It's quite different from the Watergate model."

Also, brought up within the article is the fact that columnist Robert D. Novak is not facing the court, even though it was Novak that outed Plame originally.  This means Novak probably knows the identities of the primary-source leakers who likely identified Plame for political payback for her husband's--former Ambassador Joseph Wilson--public critique of some of the administration's claims about Iraq's pursuit of WMDs.  Speaking of the leak--punishable by up to ten years in prison--columnist Richard Cohen said it was, "Nixonian in its malevolence."

Guards on the Cheap

Who is guarding the nation's terrorist targets? The Congressional Research Service has just published a new report compiling what is known about security guards at airports, nuclear power plants, and other targets of interest. The report notes that contract guards from companies like Wackenhut are paid on average $19,400, which is "less than half of the average salary for police and well below the average U.S. salary for all occupations." U.S. guard training falls behind other industrialized nations. POGO's own investigations uncovered a pattern of nuclear power plants where janitors were better paid than security guards.

9/11 Bill -- More Secrecy?

Behind closed doors good government groups pass around rumor and fact about a variety of provisions being considered in the 9/11 bill that would make the government's intelligence activities more secret and less accountable. Early hopes were dashed over the very reasonable proposal by the 9/11 Commission to declassify the intelligence budget. Yet, the 9/11 Commission report credited a Cold War culture of secrecy with hindering the government's fight against terrorism and went on to say that "democracy's best oversight mechanism" is "public disclosure." Provisions of concern include one that would waive Congress' ability to oversee intelligence activities, one that would give excessive exemption to the Freedom of Information Act, and another that would force all intelligence employees to waive their rights when blowing the whistle. At a hefty 500 pages, much mischief can be had with the 9/11 legislation. Meanwhile, the White House succeeds in stalling whistleblower protections Republicans promised in this session of Congress.

Secret Laws

Almost 2000 years BC, Hammurabi put Babylon’s laws in writing for the first time ever "so that all men might read and know what was required of them." 4000 years later, the U.S. government is making public laws passé, according to an excellent article by Steve Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists. When former Representative Helen Chenoweth-Hage (R-Idaho) faced a security guard pat-down before flying, she demanded to see the regulation authorizing the search. One government official responded "That is called 'sensitive security information.' She's not allowed to see it, nor is anyone else." 

Surf at Your Own Risk

Not content to threaten its employees with jail time for talking to the public about agency activities, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has deployed a new way to intimidate. Two of its agencies have posted public web sites with the following threat:

“**WARNING**WARNING**WARNING**

This is a United States Department of Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency computer system, hosted by Strategic Analysis Inc., which may be accessed and used only for official Government business by authorized personnel. Unauthorized access or use of this computer system may subject violators to criminal, civil and/or administrative action. All information on this computer system may be intercepted, recorded, read, copied, and disclosed by and to authorized personnel for official purposes, including criminal investigations. Access or use of this computer system by any person whether authorized or unauthorized, constitutes consent to these terms.

**WARNING**WARNING**WARNING**”

The web sites can be viewed here -- http://www.hsarpabaa.com and  http://www.hsarpasbir.com

Ed Hammond of the Sunshine Project was surprised to discover the web site language while checking up on DHS biodefense programs.

Resigning or Running Scared?

As the Bush Administration revolving door winds up, Air Force Secretary James G. Roche announced he was leaving his post. But, was he just resigning? Or running scared from brewing conflict of interest investigations?

Roche may become the latest casualty of Senator John McCain’s diligent digging into the Boeing tanker leasing deal. According to emails obtained by McCain, the White House made a miraculous turn-around on supporting the tanker deal within days of a back-scratching favor by Roche. Roche endorsed the brother of Robin Cleveland, an Office of Management and Budget official who appeared to shepherd the White House endorsement, for a job at former employer Northrop Grumman. CongressDaily reports: “After forwarding the information to Northrop Grumman and offering his endorsement, Roche wrote to Cleveland: ‘Be well. Smile. Give me tankers now.’ In a subsequent sentence, he qualified the statement as a joke.” That was May 11, 2003. After a meeting between Cleveland and Boeing and more chatty emails, the White House endorsed the deal on May 23. In the Washington Post, Air Force spokesman William Nichols responds to the hubub: “Doctor Roche is confident that the IG [Inspector General] will find nothing criminal or unethical in the course of their investigation.” 

It is difficult to imagine under any circumstances how it would be appropriate for Roche to broker jobs at Northrop Grumman, particularly for higher-up government officials, given that he is in charge of $5 billion in contracts for the company.

Such is the state of affairs in stone-deaf, blind, and numb Washington, DC where Air Force hacks can spin control to their heart’s content. Few seem truly outraged about the revolving door between the government and its contractors. When POGO complained about Air Force buyer Darleen Druyun’s departure for Boeing, the yawns were deafening. Now she and cohorts face jail.

Air Force funded psychic teleportation study, "crackpot science"

Where's the oversight?  Millions of taxpayer dollars are being wasted on crackpot science.  The USA Today reports:

Star Trek fans may be happy to hear that the Air Force has paid to study psychic teleportation.

But scientists aren't so thrilled.

The Air Force Research Lab's August "Teleportation Physics Report," posted earlier this week on the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) Web site, struck a raw nerve with physicists and critics of wasteful military spending.

In the report, author Eric Davis says psychic teleportation, moving yourself from location to location through mind powers, is "quite real and can be controlled."

...

"It is in large part crackpot physics," says physicist Lawrence Krauss of Case Western Reserve University, author of The Physics of Star Trek, a book detailing the physical limits that prevent teleportation. He describes the Air Force report as "some things adapted from reasonable theoretical studies, and other things from nonsensical ones."

Some experts have long criticized what they see as a military sweet tooth for junk science. A "remote viewing" project, for example, undertaken by defense intelligence services and declassified in 1994, sought to see whether psychic powers could be employed to spy on the Soviet Union. The teleportation report "raises questions of scientific quality control at the Air Force," the FAS' Steven Aftergood says.

Davis, a physicist with Warp Drive Metrics of Las Vegas, couldn't be reached for comment. The Air Force paid $25,000 for the report, part of a $20.5 million advanced rocket and missile design contract. The report calls for $7.5 million to conduct psychic teleportation experiments. (emphasis POGO's)

Intell bill provision would weaken disclosure of conflicts of interest

Some Republican representatives are attempting to limit financial disclosure for "all executive branch officials," not just intelligence officials, under the guise of national security in the House intelligence reform bill.  This is pure opportunism with the worst intention: hiding conflicts of interest and lucrative buddy-buddy deals that milk from the the expansive Homeland and National Security complex. 

The LA Times reports (free registration req'd):

The new disclosure policies would make it harder to detect when officials have personal financial stakes in matters before them, watchdog groups say. The current rules require officials to list the value of their assets in categories, beginning at "none or less than $1,000" and ending at "more than $50 million."

...

Last week, three nonprofit watchdog groups — Public Citizen, the Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21 — urged the conference committee to get rid of the "ill-considered provisions." Keeping disclosure rules in place is critical, the groups said.

The current law "serves as an important check on potential conflicts of interest without imposing unreasonable reporting burdens on officials," the groups said, noting that the disclosure of stock sales, with dates, "provides the greatest single safeguard against insider trading by government officials. The timing of such transfers can serve as a red flag for potential fraud, and disclosure of these transactions is therefore a first-line defense against corruption."

Waxman also wrote to the Republican leadership, urging that they reject any efforts to use the legislation to undermine financial disclosure rules or expand the limits on disclosure to Congress. He said Democratic members had sought unsuccessfully to strike the provision from the House proposal.

Financial disclosure forms have been used to shed light on the private assets of public officials. In 2002, the Center for Public Integrity revealed that 22 of the top 100 Bush administration officials had "significant" holdings in companies that had lobbied their departments, agencies or offices.

Access to Taxpayer-Funded Medical Research

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) takes public comment until tomorrow on a proposal to make the findings of NIH-funded research available online for free. The proposal appears to be supported by almost everyone except publishers of medical journals. The journals have had exclusive ability to publish the research findings and claim that they will lose revenues under the new proposal. However, the NIH proposal gives the journals six months of exclusivity before making the taxpayer-funded research available to the public. This is not only reasonable, but one might argue deferential to the journals. One of the largest journals, New England Journal of Medicine, already posts its articles for free after six months.

Earlier this year, Congress encouraged NIH to move forward with putting research online, saying: “The Committee is very concerned that there is insufficient public access to reports and data resulting from NIH-funded research. This situation, which has been exacerbated by the dramatic rise in scientific journal subscription prices, is contrary to the best interests of the U.S. taxpayers who paid for this research.” The Alliance for Taxpayer Access is also encouraging the NIH proposal.

 

Nuclear Power Whistleblower to Receive Award

This Thursday POGO will present its annual Beyond the Headlines Award to nuclear power plant security whistleblower Anthony Rizzo.

Rizzo was instrumental in bringing attention and change to nuclear power plant security.  When the industry falsely advertised strong and adequate security at facilities such as at Salem and Hope Creek nuclear power plant in Lower Alloways Creek Township in New Jersey--where Rizzo worked--Rizzo decided to speak his mind.

Rizzo worked with POGO to expose poor security guard training and the excessive overtime hours guards worked.  He has testified on Capitol Hill and helped lead to changes in Nuclear Regulatory Commission policies that increased security guard training and capped the maximum required overtime hours that guards could work.

Anthony Rizzo truly is a "whistleblower who has gone the extra mile to positively impact public policy."

Intell Reform Dead On Arrival?

Will the efforts of the 9/11 Commission and 9/11 victim families go to waste?  The LA Times reports (free registration req'd):

"Despite his public support for restructuring the nation's intelligence community, President Bush has done little to ensure that reforms modeled on the recommendations of the bipartisan Sept. 11 commission pass in the coming lame duck session of Congress.

And the legislation, which has run into stiff opposition from the Defense Department, is thought to have little chance of passage when a new Congress begins work next year."

POGO has been somewhat critical of aspects of the Intelligence reform legislation, especially the possibility of increased secrecy that could, however, be fixed (also see "The harm of too much secrecy," The Houston Chronicle, free registration req'd.) The bills currently have language that may expand a troublesome exemption to the Freedom of Information Act—the intelligence “sources and methods” exemption that the government abuses.

Yet, killing the needed reform of America's intelligence community is short-sighted and disingenuous of politicians--who all tout security as a priority--especially the White House. 

UCS: Restore scientific integrity

This Wednesday the Union of Concerned Scientists chair Kurt Gottfried issued a statement calling for the return of "scientific integrity in policy making."  The brief statement says "decisions about science-related policies [should] be based on facts" and that scientific conclusions should "not be suppressed or misrepresented."

UCS has noted that advisory panels on issues such as Arms Control and Bioethics have been dismissed or meddled with and scientific conclusions--when at odds with the Bush administration party line--are often quashed.  A report last year by the House Government Reform committee's minority office raises similar concerns.

In related science news, GovExec reports that the Park Service Advisory Board has called for better science (i.e. more resources devoted to science research) at the National Park Service.  At least some have linked purportedly weak science at NPS with the Bush administration.  According to Howard McCurdy, NPS volunteer and professor of public administration with expertise in science policy at American University, "The Bush administration has not emphasized science ... to the same extent that has occurred under previous administrations, both Republican and Democratic."