FOI at Work: The Washington Post Investigates AIDS Organizations in DC

Check out this investigation undertaken by The Washington Post:

"Over ten months, the Washington Post analyzed the spending, services, and finances of every specialized AIDS organization funded by D.C.'s HIV/AIDS Administration from 2004-2008, an estimated 90 groups, building a database from tax returns, audits, lawsuits, real estate records, D.C. Council records, and corporate and police reports. The Post also obtained grant agreements, invoices and government correspondence for about 60 of these groups. The newspaper interviewed dozens of people with HIV or AIDS patients, their families and service providers, and visited more than a dozen offices across the city."

Most states fail to use Web to inform about stimulus spending

Good Jobs First, a non-profit research center based in Washington, D.C., studied state Web sites to determine the quality and quantity of disclosure related to how stimulus funding is being divided up among communities, organizations and individuals. Each state was graded twice on a scale of 0 to 100. Only six states scored 50 or better for their main American Recovery and Reinvestment Act site. Thirteen scored 50 or better for their highway reporting. Illinois scored a zero in both categories because it only provides national figures.

While some states have created impressive websites to disseminate information about their share of the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), most are failing to make effective use of online technology to educate taxpayers about the impact of economic stimulus spending. This is the finding of Show Us the Stimulus, a report released today by Good Jobs First, a non-profit research center based in Washington, DC.

“Many states are failing to support President Obama’s vow that the Recovery Act will be carried out with an unprecedented level of transparency and accountability,” said Good Jobs First executive director Greg LeRoy. “By failing to use broadly available web tools, they are making it more difficult to measure the success of ARRA in mitigating the effects of the recession.”

Read the full report here.

Release of CIA torture report delayed

The ACLU is challenging the delayed release of the CIA's 2004 inspector-general report, The Washington Independent reported. The 200-page report, which is supposed to be declassified as part of an FOIA lawsuit agreement, will not be released before Aug. 31, according to the Justice Department. The ACLU says that the CIA and Justice Department have missed three deadlines already for the disclosure during the five months they've had to review the report.

Word’s coming now that the Obama administration is seeking to withhold the CIA’s 2004 inspector-general report on the implementation of its former “enhanced interrogation regime” until August 31. The ACLU, which had an agreement with the administration to declassify the report as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, is going to challenge the administration’s efforts. More soon.

Update: Just got a hold of the court documents. Check them out after the jump.

The Justice Department argues that the volume of material it needs to go through in the CIA’s 2004 inspector general report is just too great to meet any pre-August 31 timetable. Not only is the IG report itself 200 pages, that’s just one of 319 documents under review as part of the case.

More here.

Obama embraces another Bush secrecy policy

The Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed a lawsuit against the Obama administration after Secret Service rejected requests for White House visitor logs, the Washington Post reported. CREW specifically sought data on the visits of coal company executives but had submitted a broader request for logs that was also denied. Obama's administration says the policies are being reviewed.

President Obama has embraced Bush Administration justifications for denying public access to White House visitors logs even as advisers say they are reviewing the policy of keeping secret the official record of comings and goings.

In recent days, the Secret Service has rejected requests from two organizations for the logs, which document the West Wing meetings that have helped shape Obama's policies on banking regulation, economic recovery, foreign policy and the auto industry.

Today, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed a lawsuit against the Obama administration seeking release of the visits of coal company executives to the White House. Msnbc.com reported today that their broader request for logs since Jan. 20 was also denied.

More here.

D.C. Open Government Coalition searches for supporters

Tom Susman, a former partner with Ropes & Gray law firm, initiated the start of the D.C. Open Government Coalition, the Washington Examiner reported. Melissa Davenport, who provided pro bono services during the conceptual stage and took a one-year "public interest fellowship" from the firm to serve as executive director of the coalition, is meeting with various communities to drum up membership. The coalition is also working on a citizen's guide to the FOIA.

Melissa Davenport will tell you that the recent controversy surrounding Mayor Adrian M. Fenty’s unwillingness to disclose information about a variety of things, including the cost of his trip to Dubai, didn’t motivate the founding of the D.C. Open Government Coalition.

“Our effort is not pegged to any administration,” she told me earlier this week. “We happen to believe the best mechanism for holding the government accountable is openness.”

Residents agree. But often they lack the knowledge, financial resources or political clout to tangle with a powerful executive. It took Judicial Watch, a national group, to squeeze from the Fenty administration details surrounding his out-of-town junkets.

More here.

NFOIC Summit: FOI & Infrastructure

James Shiffer, reporter and editor at the Minneapolis Star Tribune; Tisha Thompson, investigative reporter at WTTG Fox 5 in Washington, D.C.; and Jaimi Dowdell, IRE training director and former computer-assisted reporting editor at St. Louis Post-Dispatch, discussed how to use FOI to inform the public about infrastructure issues. Patrice McDermott, director of OpenTheGovernment.org, moderated. Here are some notes from their session at the 2009 NFOIC Summit:

Lessons from the Minneapolis I-35W Bridge collapse:

• The Minneapolis I-35W Bridge collapsed at 6:05 p.m. a couple blocks from the Star Tribune office. James Shiffer said the Star Tribune had a suspicion that there was something in the bridge's history that would explain why the collapse occurred. Reporters used the National Bridge Inventory database as the basis for a front-page story. The bridge had been declared structurally deficient as recently as 2005.
  
• On Aug. 2, the paper filed its two first formal requests related to inspection and maintenance records. Reporters followed up with four additional requests that month about contractors who worked on the bridge. Minnesota Government Data Practices Act requires that relevant corporate records of government contractors are public.
• The conclusion was that the bridge had a design defect dated back 40 years. However, the paper did get Missouri Department of Transportation to acknowledge that part of it was bent. This was visible in photos, and at least one inspection noted the bending. You didn't have to be an engineer to notice.
• This was the most studied bridge in Minnesota. A Star Tribune columnist pointed out that when it was announced that a bridge had collapsed, a lot of people probably didn't have to ask which one.
• The Minnesota Department of Transportation was bombarded with records requests from journalists, lawyers, construction companies and victims. The organization did a good job early on in putting the inspection reports online. They couldn't argue that the information was protected because of homeland security. The bridge was gone.
• Shiffer said MDOT was not good at providing notes, photos and internal documents. The newspaper gave MDOT a draft lawsuit, which got them going. The excuse was that the inspectors were too busy making sure other bridges were safe to answer questions or find records. You want us to do our jobs, right? they asked. Four months later, MDOT dumped data online, but the system was difficult to use. The newspaper reporters were not allowed into the office to view the files.
• The National Transportation Safety Board completed its report, which included citations of documents and memos that MDOT hadn't turned over to the Star Tribune via FOIA and hadn't released on its database.
  
• Jaimi Dowdell said the St. Louis Post-Dispatch used bridge databases to conduct its own analysis the first day after the collapse. Then, reporters began analyzing similar St. Louis bridges by requesting audit and inspection records.
• Tisha Thompson noted that agencies shut down records after the Minnesota bridge collapse. They realized that the records tattled on them.

Lessons from bridges and dams coverage:

• From FOIA documents, Tisha Thompson reported on a Kentucky bridge with rusted bolts and rotten pillars and rails, a Baltimore bridge with loose timber beginning to decay and a D.C. bridge with a tree growing out of its side. (The tree was slowly pulling the bridge apart.)
• Thompson says stories on bridges and dams are the easiest to do because there are federal inspection requirements.
  
• When a dam broke in St. Louis, Jaimi Dowdell's team did an immediate story based on the National Inventory of Dams database. They then requested reports from state studies. In doing so, they found a state clause that sets up an agricultural exemption for dams to be inspected. So many dams were not being inspected because they were under a certain height. It turned into a watchdog story. You never know where FOI paths can take you.
• The dam database has been shut down to the public. It doesn't have data after 2002 because of homeland security concerns.
• Access to records often depends on the agency and who's in charge. Thompson recalled that Virginia shut down records on all 13,000 of its bridges because of homeland security. She had no problems getting dam inspection reports from dams. It was the opposite in Maryland.
• Thompson couldn't get data on a small bridge in the middle of nowhere because of homeland security concerns. Only 72 people passed over the bridge in a day. She explained the ridiculousness of this excuse. The furthest she got was being allowed to view documents in the office. She was not allowed to photocopy them.
• Thompson said that although agencies fought her on the data on the bridges, they replaced every bridge she covered.
• James Shiffer described one of his reporters who talked to the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers concern a dam that the Minnesota hoped to get stimulus money to rebuild. The reporter got full access to inspection reports because the state wanted it fixed. However, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers refused to speak with the reporter regarding another dam next to the Ford Plant that might have water seeping underneath it. The corp used the homeland security excuse. Eventually an interview was reluctantly arranged.
  

D.C. Open Government Coalition plans its first meeting

From Melissa Davenport, executive director of D.C. Open Government Coalition:

Please save the date for the first organizational meeting of the D.C. Open Government Coalition:

When: Tuesday, June 23rd, at 5:30 p.m.
Where: Ropes & Gray offices (located at Metro Center, 700 12th St. NW, Suite 900)

The Coalition will be working to increase transparency and access to government information in the District of Columbia. We welcome anyone interested in helping to set the Coalition's initial agenda and look forward to your participation in refining our focus and thinking about how we can best have an impact in this area. We will also establish the Coalition's new Board of Directors.
In addition, at this meeting the Coalition will release its first publication, a citizens' guide to the D.C. Freedom of Information Act.

Please join us! And don't hesitate to be in touch with any questions or suggestions.

Drug-addict study released via FOIA request raises ethical questions

A 1994-95 research study, released in response to an FOIA request, indicates that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs gave heroin addicts regular doses of morphine and then cut the doses off to measure the effects, the Washington Examiner reported. The patients suffered 787 "adverse events"; however, no follow-up information is available on the study's subjects.

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs spent at least $7.8 million in a secretive experiment to determine whether drug addicts become hyperactive when they suddenly lose access to morphine, documents obtained by The Examiner show.

The VA recruited 69 heroin addicts and began giving them regular doses of morphine. The scientists then cut off the morphine doses at intervals to see what would happen, internal reports show.

The decade-old study, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, offers the fullest picture yet of widespread government trials that gave hard-core drugs to addicts.

More here.

Obama contradiction leads to bill

The Obama administration ruffled quite a few feathers by taking the same position as former President Bush on an issue involving government secrecy and torture, two positions Obama condemned upon entering office. Now legislation has been filed to limit the use of the "state secrets" privilege, the Boston Globe reported. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy said the bill "does not restrict the government's ability to assert the privilege in appropriate cases. In light of the pending cases where this privilege has been invoked, involving issues including torture, rendition and warrantless wiretapping, we can ill afford to delay consideration of this important legislation."

House and Senate committees yesterday introduced bills that would sharply curtail the government's use of the "state secrets" privilege, a policy used by President Bush to argue that a lawsuit involving allegations of torture should be dismissed - and a position that the Obama administration has now adopted.

Drafted and filed separately by the House and Senate Judiciary committees, the legislation was filed just days after Justice Department lawyers working for the new administration told a federal appeals court that its position did not differ from the Bush administration's: the court should throw out a lawsuit that accuses Jeppesen Inc., of helping the CIA secretly transport five terrorism suspects overseas for harsh interrogations, on the grounds that the suit involved state secrets that, if revealed, could jeopardize national security.

More here.

Federal shield law may be on the way

The Free Flow of Information Act of 2009 is a dream for journalists who worry about going to jail for not revealing confidential sources. Journalists would only be forced to relinquish this qualified privilege in cases that involve issues such as national security or threats of imminent bodily harm.

Citing the need for a federal media shield law to protect reporters from being compelled to reveal their confidential news sources, U.S. Representatives Rick Boucher (D-VA) and Mike Pence (R-IN) today introduced the Free Flow of Information Act of 2009. In the 110th Congress, the measure Boucher and Pence advanced was approved by an overwhelming, bipartisan majority of 398 to 21 in the House of Representatives. The Senate did not take up the measure in the last Congress. Boucher and Pence are joined in sponsorship of the bill by 37 of their colleagues in the House, including Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) and Vice Ranking Member of the Committee, Bob Goodlatte (R-VA).

"Often the best source of information about public corruption or misdeeds in a large corporation or charity is a person on the inside of the organization who would like to bring the facts to public light, but that person has a lot to lose and to avoid punishment at the hands of superiors will only divulge the information to a reporter if promised confidentiality," Boucher said. "If confidentiality cannot be assured, the public may never learn of the wrong doing and never have an opportunity to take corrective action," he added.

Thirty-six states and the District of Columbia currently have statutes protecting reporters from the compelled disclosure of sources of information.

More here.