Sen. Feingold Urges “Concrete Steps” to Restore Rule of Law
In a December 10 letter to President-elect Obama, Sen. Russ Feingold urged the next Administration to take a series of specific measures to strengthen the rule of law. Distilled from the record (pdf) of a September 16 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the subject, the recommendations addressed four topics in particular: separation of powers, excessive government secrecy, detention and interrogation policy, and domestic surveillance.
The letter’s recommendations on combating excessive government secrecy included brief reference to a proposal stressed by the Federation of American Scientists for a fundamental review of agency classification guides to eliminate obsolete or unnecessary classification instructions.
Establishing such a review may be even more important than revising the executive order on classification or rescinding of the Ashcroft policy on FOIA, both desirable steps but which are only loosely coupled to daily secrecy decisions. By comparison, revising agency classification guides — which specify what information shall be classified at what level — and updating them to eliminate spurious secrecy requirements would have immediate favorable consequences for agency practice, particularly since many classification guides have not been reviewed for years. (See “Overcoming Overclassification,” Secrecy News, September 16, 2008.)
No one will be surprised if we end up with a continuing resolution to push our shutdown deadline out past the midterms, so the real question is what else will they get done this summer?
Rebuilding public participation starts with something simple — treating the public not as a problem to manage, but as a source of ingenuity government cannot function without.
If the government wants a system of learning and adaptation that improves results in real time, it has to treat translation, utilization, and adaptation as core functions of governance rather than as afterthoughts.
Coordination among federal science agencies is essential to ensure government-wide alignment on R&D investment priorities. However, the federal R&D enterprise suffers from egregious siloization.