Advice for the President p.

By: Debra Gersh

Six media organizations send information policy paper to President Clinton and Vice President Gore sp.

Calling on President Clinton to "reverse the information policies and practices of previous administrations," six media organizations have sent an information policy paper to the president and Vice President Gore.
"President Clinton will have an extraordinary opportunity to fulfill the ideal of participatory democracy in America through his presidential authority over and dissemination of information to the public and the press," the paper, "Maintaining an Informed Democracy," stated.
Sent by the American Society of Newspaper Editors, the Newsletter Publishers Association, the National Newspaper Association, the Radio-Television News Directors Association, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the Society of Professional Journalists, the six-page report outlines suggested policy in areas such as access, the military, subpoenas, the National Archives and impersonation of journalists.
ASNE counsel, Richard M. Schmidt Jr. of the Washington, D.C., law firm Cohn & Marks, said such a paper has not been sent to a new president by these groups before, but in light of Clinton's statements and the abuses of the past 12 years, this ad hoc group of media organizations thought the time was right.
The paper and cover letter were sent to the president and vice president Jan. 22.
Issues to be included in the policy paper were determined by an informal coalition of media groups in the Washington area, and those six groups listed chose to sign the paper, Schmidt said.
The Newspaper Association of America was sent a draft copy of the paper but did not sign it.
Newspaper Association of America senior vice president/government, legal and public affairs John Sturm recommended that the NAA executive committee not sign the draft version because of language that was unnecessarily harsh, particularly that dealing with the appointment of a new archivist.
The NAA executive committee chose not to comment on or suggest changes to the paper. It believed it did not have time, because it thought the paper was to be sent prior to the Jan. 20 inauguration.
The "meaningful exercise" of First Amendment rights, the paper stated, "requires the political will of the president, and his continued personal commitment to open government, an informed electorate and a free press."
The journalism groups charged that "through a series of stringent controls and practices" the Reagan and Bush administrations "systematically reduced public access to information about their government."
Personnel appointments should be made aware of the president's stand on open government, and the "commitment to these beliefs should be assessed in the records of presidential appointees and future judges."
New directors, the paper suggested, should be named for the Office of Management and Budget, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, and the Office of Information and Security Oversight.
Other appointments should include new Justice Department officials with authority over the Office of Information and Privacy, and a new Archivist of the United States.
The groups believe that President Clinton should issue a new executive order for defining and protecting national security information, a practice "of almost every new president."
The president should be sure the order regarding classified information does the following, according to the groups' paper:
? "Balances the public's interest in access against the need for classifying for national security reasons;
? "Places equal emphasis upon classification and declassification;
? "Narrows the criteria for classification;
? "Reduces the volume of classified information;
? "Creates schedules for systematic declassification;
? "Eliminates the authority to reclassify information in the public domain;
? "Creates greater accountability and information security standards for all classified information, including compartmentalized and special access information."
The Freedom of Information Act, the Government in the Sunshine Act and related provisions in the Administrative Procedures Act and the Federal Advisory Committee Act are the clearest indicators of the "personal commitment and the political will of the president and Cabinet officials to the ideals of open government."
To that end, the journalism groups maintain that "certain actions will lend immediate credibility and strengthen" the FoI and Sunshine Acts, as well as related legislation.
Among the actions suggested are:
? "Designate a Justice Department official to review, oversee and make recommendations for change in the Office of Information and Privacy;
? "Support executive policies and legislation to strengthen FoIA (including ensuring public access to electronic records);
? "Designate a high-level Justice Department official to oversee, review and seek recommendations for proper implementation of FoIA, the Government in the Sunshine Act, and the Privacy Act; to stop egregious delays and arbitrary denials; and to restructure the management and mission of the Office of Information and Privacy;
? "Adopt a policy limiting FoIA denials and defense of such denials to the standard of demonstrable harm;
? "Separate the functions of FoIA appeals and FoIA policy from inside the Office of Information and Privacy;
? "Establish standards and schedules for resolving and settling all outstanding FoIA litigation;
? "Announce the attorney general's intent to comply with disclosure policy underlying FoIA;
? "Prohibit political abuse, through any means (including delay or selective processing), of FoIA and related laws;
? "Conduct a study and seek recommendations for needs related to requests for electronic and other formats;
? "Mandate vigorous enforcement of the Government in the Sunshine and Federal Advisory Committee Acts;
? "Ensure that agency public affairs officials, including those of the Department of Justice, respond promptly and responsibly to all inquiries from the press and public."
Changes also are called for in the OMB Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs and the National Archives, according to the paper.
The six groups charge that OIRA has been politicized. They suggest its administrator should have professional qualifications "consistent with the statutory mission and enumerated functions," who will give balanced emphasis to all functions, and that OIRA be included as a separate line item within the OMB budget for greater oversight and accountability.
In addition, the paper calls for appointment of a new Archivist of the United States, as the "current administration of the National Archives does not have the confidence of the Congress, the archival and research community, or journalists." A new FoIA exemption for information of "commercial value," rather than increasing competitiveness, "has frequently served to inhibit, if not diminish, opportunities for advances in commerce, science and technology," according to the policy paper.
Not only has this policy restricted the movement and participation in conferences and review of papers of foreign scientists and professors in the U.S., but also these "restrictions on disclosure of export licenses granted by the Commerce Department enabled administration officials to assist Iraq, Syria and other nations without knowledge by the public or Congress that law and policy were being violated to do so." The paper points out that already there are restrictions on trade secrets and other proprietary information in FoIA, so "new proprietary rights in government information should not be created."
The relationship of the U.S. military and the media has been a hot topic, especially since the Persian Gulf war. Since then, the Department of Defense has adopted principles for coverage of military action that were worked out with media representatives, but it also has proposed rules for inclusion in the DoD National Press Pool.
The six media groups suggest that the president, DoD officials and the heads of Central Command and the service branches do the following:
? "Adopt the May 1992 Statement of Principles on Military-Media Relations;
? "Maintain civilian control of press policy;
? "Rescind the proposed September 1992 Eligibility Criteria for News Media Membership in the DoD National Media Pool;
? "Establish ongoing dialogue and training with military officials and media organizations for military and media education;
? "Ensure development of a military public affairs plan as a primary element of military operations plans;
? "Ensure proper training of military public affairs officers;
"Adopt as a mutual military-media objective the goal of informing the American public with timely, accurate, independent, and thorough reporting in a manner consistent with preserving military security during wartime."
Although the attorney general's guidelines state that the federal government may not subpoena a reporter unless the information is essential to the case and cannot be obtained elsewhere, the policy paper charges that "this practice was ignored during the tenure of Attorney General William P. Barr."
To combat these problems, the groups recommend that the incoming attorney general issue a statement that DoJ will "strictly honor" standards set in the attorney general's guidelines, and that the new DoJ head meet with members of the media, as well as heads of the civil and criminal divisions, "to understand the basis for the policy . . . and avoid future legal battles over confidential sources and information."
The six organizations also noted that in 1987 the Federal Bureau of Investigation used a reporter's name and credentials to gain access to a spy who said he wanted to tell his story to the press. Although the journalist found out about the scheme three years later, the FBI refused to discuss it with him.
To avoid similar situations, the paper suggests that the new attorney general remove authorization from the guidelines "which permits FBI agents to pose as members of the news media and ask members of the news media about professional or confidential relationships with others."
The paper recalled that in his inaugural address and campaign speeches, President Clinton "challenged the American people to join him in revitalizing the institutions of American democracy.
"That effort cannot succeed, however, without free and informed debate ? an essential element of a strong and vigorous democracy," the groups pointed out. "By adopting the recommendations set forth above, President Clinton can take a historic step toward fulfilling this ideal."