Possible Freedom Of Information Act Changes

By Cliff Montgomery – May 30th, 2016

Congress is considering two bills which might expand the ability of the public to discover what U.S. government officials are actually doing in the name of the American people.

Each bill is designed to make it easier for journalists and the wider public to access federal records via the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA), according to a very interesting report released last month by the Congressional Research Service.

“The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), originally enacted in 1966, provides the public presumed access to federal government information. This access is available to any person, regardless of citizenship,” according to the study.

However, the actual FOIA process often can be quite difficult, with requests that sometimes languish for extended periods without a government response, the requestor’s potential need to pay multiple – and often varying – fees to process a request, and a person occasionally receiving questionable explanations for why a request to release information was denied.

Below, The American Spark quotes the report’s summary:

Congress is currently considering legislation that would make substantive changes to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). FOIA was originally enacted in 1966 and has been amended numerous times since—most recently in 2009. FOIA provides the public with a presumptive right to access agency records, limited by nine exemptions that allow agencies to withhold certain types or categories of records.

“The legislation under consideration in the 114th Congress, S. 337 and H.R. 653, is largely based on bills from the 113th Congress, S. 2520 and H.R. 1211.

“Both of the bills in the current Congress seek to amend a number of provisions of FOIA for the purpose of increasing public access—including improving electronic accessibility of agency records, clarifying the right to request information related to intra- and inter-agency memoranda or letters, standardizing the use of search and duplication fees by agencies, and requiring agencies to notify requestors of the status of their requests and of the availability of dispute resolution processes for requests that they believe have been inappropriately denied.

“Both bills would also create a Chief FOIA Officers Council, responsible for informing government-wide FOIA administrators of best practices, and would establish new FOIA-related oversight responsibilities and reporting requirements.

“In addition, both the House and Senate legislation would establish a statutory ‘presumption of openness,’ whereby information may only be withheld if it harms an interest protected by a statutory exemption or if disclosure is prohibited by law. This presumption of openness would codify the principles outlined in the current Administration’s guidance on FOIA.

“While these bills address a number of similar topics, often in similar ways, there are substantive differences between them.

“For instance, S. 337 provides a timetable for the assessment of fees if an agency fails to comply with a statutory FOIA request response deadline. Conversely, H.R. 653 would authorize applicable federal inspectors general to review agencies’ FOIA compliance and recommend the agency head take potential adverse actions against improper or negligent execution of the law.

“In addition, both H.R. 653 and S. 337 include language seeking to cap the amount of time that agencies can withhold intra- or inter-agency records. The House bill, however, provides additional details that would further limit the withholding of such records.

“A summary of provisions in both bills, a side-by-side comparison of these provisions, and analysis of selected provisions is provided in this report.

“In some areas, amendments to the House and Senate bills made the bills more similar. For example, an amendment to H.R. 653 brought the process for determining FOIA-related search or duplication fees assessed after statutory deadlines have passed more in line with the provisions in S. 337.

“In other areas, amendments were added to H.R. 653 that are not found in any version of S. 337. For example, H.R. 653 contains provisions requiring annual training for federal employees on their FOIA-related responsibilities. H.R. 653 would also provide authority to suspend or remove federal employees found to have violated FOIA or a FOIA-related regulation.

“S. 337, as amended, does not contain the training requirement or violation provisions.

“This report provides a side-by-side comparison of the bills, using the versions that have passed each of their originating congressional chambers.

“The report also provides context related to bill amendments and language additions that occurred between bill versions, when applicable.

“Finally, the report provides analysis of certain provisions of the bills.”

Sign Up for our e-Newsletter

You can expect to stay well ahead of the game, with the tough, insightful reporting of our e-Newsletter. No info-tainment or shouting matches passed off as ‘news’, but the real deal, sent to your personal e-mail every Monday morning, for less than 30 cents an issue.
Sign Up Today!