The Freedom of Information Act “continues to be a valuable tool for citizens to obtain information about the operation and decisions of the federal government,” the Government Accountability Office reported at a July 26 House hearing.
“Since 2002, agencies have received increasing numbers of requests and have also continued to increase the number of requests that they process. In addition, agencies continue to grant most requests in full. However, the rate of increase in pending requests is accelerating,” the GAO concluded in its testimony (pdf), which provided substantial new data on individual agency FOIA practices.
Critical assessments of FOIA policy were also presented by Patrice McDermott of OpenTheGovernment.org and by Tonda Rush of the Sunshine in Government Initiative. Dan Metcalfe presented the viewpoint of the Department of Justice at the hearing, which also featured Senator Patrick Leahy, Sen. John Cornyn, and Rep. Brad Sherman.
See the prepared statements from “Implementing FOIA– Does the Bush Administration’s Executive Order Improve Processing?” hearing before the Subcommittee on Government Management of the House Government Reform Committee, July 26, here.
On July 24, a federal court told the National Reconnaissance Office that it could not use the “operational files” exemption to withhold its Congressional Budget Justification Book from processing under the FOIA.
But on July 25, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency denied a FOIA request for a copy of its Congressional Budget Justification Book. Why? Because, NGA said, it is an “operational file” that is exempt from FOIA processing. Sigh. An appeal was filed explaining that this claim has been found unlawful.
See, relatedly, “Judge: Spy satellite budget can be FOIA-ed,” by Shaun Waterman, United Press International, July 27.
These ideas aim to advance the detailed policy solutions needed to foster public trust and implement fairness in the adoption of AI across diverse domains, from healthcare and government benefits to rural access, education, and worker protections.
The evidence is clear: algorithmic pay-setting is established in app-based work, and payroll/timekeeping failures show how software can produce systemic wage harm at scale
While a few states have taken steps to implement decision-making mechanisms for certain AI systems, too many leaders are simply accepting narratives about AI’s purported public benefit at face value – jumping to the “how” of AI implementation before thoroughly vetting potential systems and deciding whether they are appropriate to use at all.
When properly structured — with specific numeric targets, secured financial obligations, independent monitoring, and meaningful enforcement — CBAs transform data center deals into durable community partnerships.