Index on Censorship, the British magazine on freedom of expression, devotes its latest issue to secrecy, surveillance and executive authority in the United States at the end of the Bush Administration. It features articles by Jameel Jaffer, Geoffrey R. Stone, Eric Lichtblau, Patrick Radden Keefe, and myself, among others. Many of the articles can be viewed online.
“For all its apparent openness, its televised debates and public hearings, Congress is more secretive than its reputation suggests,” writes Tim Starks in a Congressional Quarterly Weekly cover story. “Critics of congressional secrecy argue that the practice is not only undemocratic, it is particularly hypocritical, and it undercuts the public’s confidence in government.” See “A Dome Under Lock and Key” by Tim Starks, CQ, November 30.
When a hurricane hits, it’s all hands on deck – that goes for federal data, too. Pulling back from our investments in timely, accurate, and accessible public data will only make us less prepared and put us all at greater risk.
This is bigger than a singular elimination of race and ethnicity questions. It could accelerate the second wave of widespread reductions to demographic data, leaving public health officials with even less information to deliver better health outcomes for all Americans.
Soft law was never meant to be a permanent solution. Treating it as one, and letting the sandcastle stand in for the skyscraper indefinitely, is how we end up with a decade of voluntary commitments and no enforceable accountability to show for it.
FAS has partnered with ICLEI USA to launch the CRI Local Advisory Council.