The Obama Administration is expected to provide some new insight this week into its emerging policy on “controlled unclassified information” (CUI), referring to unclassified information that is withheld from disclosure for reasons of law or regulation.
Because of the indiscriminate use of such controls, information is often withheld unnecessarily from the public and information sharing within the government is often needlessly obstructed.
In a neat illustration of the undisciplined use of information controls, the Washington Times reported last week that even though some U.S. Capitol Police documents that were marked “law enforcement sensitive” were inadvertently disclosed, this did not pose any threat to public safety. That’s because the use of the control marking was “a standard practice,” according to Police officials, rather than a reliable indication that the documents were actually sensitive.
Sgt. Kimberly Schneider of the Capitol Police explained that the “law enforcement sensitive” marking “does not necessarily indicate that the information contained there is such.” See “Capitol Police Papers Found on Street” by Jim McElhatton, Washington Times, December 7, 2009.
Last August 25, an interagency task force transmitted a report to President Obama that presented recommendations for limiting the use of controls on unclassified information. The White House is expected to release that report this week, though the issuance of a new CUI policy is still likely to be some months away.
Update: The August 25 Report of the Presidential Task Force on Controlled Unclassified Information has now been released.
As humans expand our geographic reach, encroach on untouched natural territories, and interact more with animal populations, we will encounter novel zoonotic diseases that threaten the human body. The sooner we act to address these risks, the better.
This report serves as a landscape assessment and toolbox from which local governments can negotiate an informed position when it comes to the levers available to them and includes a first-of-its kind analysis of eight executed community benefits agreements.
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.