About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editors


Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
susanthe

ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Betsy Devine
Blue News Tribune (MA)
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Susan the Bruce

Politicos & Punditry
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
John DeJoie
Ann McLane Kuster
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Sunlight: Hodes Introduces Bill to Preserve WH Email

by: Dean Barker

Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 19:25:56 PM EDT


Because while we're working to put Karl Rove behind bars, we should simultaneously be working to make sure the Spawn of Rove in the Future can't hide their shenanigans behind the latest version of The Computer Ate My Homework (email release):
"The people of the United States deserve an open and honest record of the actions of all administrations, regardless of party," Congressman Paul Hodes said. "This bill will ensure that actions taken by the Executive Branch are transparent and that they can be held accountable to the public."

Committee investigations have revealed that during the Bush Administration, numerous White House officials - including former Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove - used e-mail accounts maintained by the Republican National Committee, which regularly deleted the e-mails from its servers.  E-mails sent by White House officials under these RNC accounts included e-mails concerning official government business.  In addition, the White House cannot account for hundreds of days worth of official White House e-mails sent and received between 2003 and 2005.  

Full version below the fold...
Dean Barker :: Sunlight: Hodes Introduces Bill to Preserve WH Email
Congressman Paul Hodes Introduces Legislation to Preserve White House Records

Washington, DC--- Congressman Paul Hodes, member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, introduced legislation, H.R. 1387, the Electronic Message Preservation Act that would require the White House to preserve all electronic communications. Today, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee marked up the legislation and passed it by a voice vote.

The legislation resulted from an investigation conducted by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that revealed significant deficiencies in the preservation of e-mail by the White House and federal agencies.  The measure was introduced last year by Congressman Paul Hodes, Chairman Henry Waxman and Congressman Lacy Clay. It passed the House of Representatives last year but stalled in the Senate.

"The people of the United States deserve an open and honest record of the actions of all administrations, regardless of party," Congressman Paul Hodes said. "This bill will ensure that actions taken by the Executive Branch are transparent and that they can be held accountable to the public."

Committee investigations have revealed that during the Bush Administration, numerous White House officials - including former Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove - used e-mail accounts maintained by the Republican National Committee, which regularly deleted the e-mails from its servers.  E-mails sent by White House officials under these RNC accounts included e-mails concerning official government business.  In addition, the White House cannot account for hundreds of days worth of official White House e-mails sent and received between 2003 and 2005.  At the time of these losses, the White House used an e-mail archiving system that a former White House information technology officer described as "primitive."

While the problems have been particularly acute under the Bush Administration, other administrations, including President Clinton's, have encountered problems preserving e-mail records.

To ensure the retention of these important records, the legislation directs the Archivist of the National Archives to establish standards for the capture, management, and preservation of White House e-mails and other electronic messages and to certify that the system meets the requirements established by the Archivist.

Under current law, federal agencies have broad discretion to determine how electronic records and electronic communications are preserved.  Committee investigations and the Government Accountability Office have found that many agencies rely on unreliable "print and file" systems for preserving electronic records, including e-mails.  As a result, many e-mails that should be saved as federal records may be lost.

The bill also directs the Archivist to issue regulations requiring agencies to preserve electronic messages that are records in an electronic format.  These regulations must cover, at a minimum, the capture, management, preservation, and electronic retrieval of these electronic records, and must be implemented within four years of the enactment of the Act.  

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
I don't think this is a good idea. (0.00 / 0)
Emails and text messages are not letters.

White House staffers, and even Presidents, are human beings, and they should be able to send the occasional email or text message without having to worry about it eventually becoming public record to be scrutinized forever, even if it's irrelevant to the public interest.

Scrutiny into official actions is one thing, but every possible communication with one's coworkers becoming public, even if it has no public interest, is an unfair and impractical working condition.


Disagree (respectfully). (4.00 / 8)
If WH employess want to get personal, they can do so on their own computers during their own off-duty time.

As for work-related communication that is legitimate but would be potentially embarrassing, I doubt highly this legislation would lead to the public disclosure of that.

There are acceptable use policies in place for technology everywhere in both private and public institutions.  It doesn't mean your communication is any less private per se, just that you are aware that, e.g, your attempt to use We the People's WH computers to direct the RNC political chop shop is being recorded, and thus discourage you from so doing.


[ Parent ]
Personal things on one's one time is not a realistic idea. (0.00 / 0)
In any office, there are bound to be emails sent that aren't work related.  And that's not necessarily a bad thing.  It's like co-workers talking to each other, and it's good for the ability of an organization to function when people know each other well.

I don't think the public has a right to know when a White House staffer sends an email to a co-worker, "Did you hear Rush/Cantor/McCain today? What an ass."

In fact, I don't think the public has a right to know when the President sends a message like that.  The usage of computers no longer lends itself to separating the personal and the professional by entire system.  It's not how it's used, and as Democrats, we should be the first to point out that sometimes you have to base policy around reality, not theoretical constructs.


[ Parent ]
You're absolutely right (0.00 / 0)
But they're running the country. What they do is our business.

[ Parent ]
What they do with respect to running the country is our business. (0.00 / 0)
Just because they sent it from a White House email address or Blackberry (and keep in mind the laws are already so restrictive on them that they don't have access to outside email from inside the White House) doesn't mean it's our business.

I'm all for making their memos public.  I just don't think it should include private communications, and it's unrealistic to say you can draw that line based on what computer is used.  Anybody whose job involves sitting behind a desk all day knows that's not a fair standard.


[ Parent ]
Co-worker (4.00 / 2)
If worker x wants to tell co-worker y that Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot, but doesn't want it popping up in a congressional hearing, there is a very simple answer: pick up the telephone. The spoken word is a very useful tool.  

E mail is a written communication that once sent, you lose all control over - the recipient can forward it to whomever they want, or can post it on the internet. There should be no expectation of privacy in an e mail.

If the people working in the White House aren't smart enough to self edit their e mails, they should be working elsewhere.
 

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    


[ Parent ]
And what about text messages and instant messaging? (0.00 / 0)
That's a nice sentiment, but it doesn't reflect the reality of how the technology is used.  And for that matter, your argument could be made of things that actually do deserve to be preserved.

[ Parent ]
I don't know how old you are (0.00 / 0)
(and I'm not asking), but I do wonder if the disagreement here is generational.

I view any typed digital communication as "writing," email, IM, texting, Tweeting, blogging, whatever.

But I think some of my students view texting and IM-ing as extensions of phone conversations.


[ Parent ]
It's not about how it's viewed, it's about how it's used. (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
Also disagreeing (respectfully) (0.00 / 0)
I believe digital emails and text messages are no different than physical letters.

[ Parent ]
you are correct in your belief good sir (4.00 / 1)
Any and all communication within the Executive Branch should be subject to archiving, given a proper time to b ekept keep from public view for security purposes, then it should all be made public.Keep the buggers honest.

"Poetry is not an expression of the party line. It's that time of night, lying in bed, thinking what you really think, making the private world public, that's what the poet does." Allen Ginsberg

[ Parent ]
They're very different. (0.00 / 0)
They're more akin to casual conversation.  As are instant messenger services such as Google Talk, which are used in many offices, but not available to White House employees.

[ Parent ]
Out Valerie Plame. (4.00 / 1)
Could be a casual converstion/text message in the White House :-)

Granted, there would probably be a few LOL's and maybe even a ROFL or two.


[ Parent ]
That's exactly the point. (0.00 / 0)
It could just as easily be spoken conversation, and yet people respect the privacy of that.

[ Parent ]
This is also true of Wall Streeters (0.00 / 0)
And every word they write is archived, searchable, actionable, and if necessary subject to subpoena. Sorry Doug, this just makes sense.

Of course, they'll just build a super-encrypted system to get around it, so it may be a moot point.


[ Parent ]
Subject to subpoena. (0.00 / 0)
That's not the same as "every text message and IM you send will be public, and since you're in the spotlight, it will be carefully nitpicked."

[ Parent ]
Scalpel vs Hatchet (4.00 / 3)
TWTM makes interesting points ... points I think best addressed by the Archivist's electronic preservation regulations called forth by Congressman Hodes' legislation. All federal departments should store electronic records and communications made by federal employees on government property, but there will not be a giant blanket rule on publicly disclosing their contents. As the president pointed out to Senator McCain, that's like using a hatchet when all that's required is using a scalpel.

In fact, different bureaus within a single federal department likely will have different disclosure and transparency standards as set out by the Archivist. For example, legal and intelligence bureaus should be held to a higher standard for preserving electronic records and communications, but their disclosure to the public should not necessarily be as expeditious as those of other bureaus and agencies. That is what the Archivist must determine under this legislation.

IMHO, in the battle between government secrecy and transparency, best to err on the side of transparency.

Well done Congressman Hodes.

Alderman-elect, City of Manchester (Ward Six)


President, NH Young Democrats


Fair points, except one. (0.00 / 0)
It's not about government secrecy, it's about personal privacy and not providing an unreasonable work environment.

[ Parent ]
Privacy (4.00 / 1)
I still think they surrender that right, to some extent. It's the White House.

[ Parent ]
That's not healthy. (0.00 / 0)
And it's prohibitive.  We wonder why people like this turn to lobbying after they leave, maybe it's because it's an easier way to make more money after being expected to endure extraordinary circumstances and long hours for little pay on the honor and good will alone.

All too often we fail to think of people in politics as being human and having the constraints and psychology of human beings.  Some things really are too much to ask.


[ Parent ]
It's necessary n/t (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
Won't somebody (4.00 / 2)
think of the interns!

[ Parent ]
Work environment (4.00 / 1)
Yes, it is a work environment - so what are they doing personal e mailing and twittering and texting sitting at their desks?  

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

[ Parent ]
Shades of gray. (0.00 / 0)
If it's a non-work related message to a co-worker, is that personal?

And if it's not personal, and it should be considered official communication, should every single conversation held within the facilities of the Executive Office of the President, no matter the content, be taped, saved, and eventually made public?  Not just subject to subpoena, but automatically in the public domain.

I'm expecting most will say "no", but the fact is that some of this more recent technology is used as casually as spoken conversation.  The only difference between putting text messages and instant messages in the public domain and putting every conversation in the public domain is that digital text is easier to collect and archive.  But if one is unethical, so is the other.


[ Parent ]
This reminds me... (0.00 / 0)
of the New Hampshire Rule of Off the Record Conversations. When I first became party chair, several incidents occurred in which someone would say to me, "I was told not to tell anyone this, but ...."  or, "Don't tell anyone this, but ...."  I suddenly realized that there is a belief that if something is not written down, then it is okay to pass it along, even if it is supposed to be a secret. Then there was the time a reporter told me something off the record.

In short, the spoken and the written word are rarely really private.  

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    


[ Parent ]
Fair enough, (0.00 / 0)
But that doesn't negate the right to a reasonable degree of privacy in the first place.  Hearsay by those you chose to speak to is not the National Archives.

[ Parent ]
Final (hopefully) thoughts on this (0.00 / 0)
I'm very much for transparency in general, but there's a serious concern that the rules for the White House in particular are too strict.

Obviously, the Bush White House was wildly and unacceptably secretive, but that aside, consider that virtually every email the President sends eventually becomes public.  Not just archived in case of subpoena; as a blanket policy, it all becomes public record.  As a result, President Bush, from his personal email, bid farewell to all the friends and family he used to correspond to, and simply gave up email altogether for eight years.  Now, again, he and his people were out of control with the secrecy, no argument there.  But surely even the President should be able to email his own daughters privately without having to worry about having to submit it to the National Archives?  

And that's another problem.  If the rules about digital communication are so restrictive that the President forgoes it entirely, what good are those rules doing?  In that scenario, it's just making things less efficient, and making the President even more isolated.

Imagine being a position where not only are you the most famous, watched, news-making individual on the planet, but everything you say to everyone in every context is prone to being published.  Now think of the few people you see every day who you can count on not to put what you say in a book, and take away many of the lines of communication you're used to having with them.  And add that to the stress of the job.

But all that aside, there is a larger intellectual point: all too often we let ourselves believe that issues are more simple than they are and that on a given issue, any movement in the general direction of what sounds good viscerally is always the right thing to do.  That's very rarely the case.  Just as there can be too much tax cutting, despite the obvious appeal, there can be too much transparency, despite the obvious appeal.  Nothing is ever that simple.  I'm not against transparency; far from it.  I'm for balance and for reasonable expectations.

There must be a balance.  And to know which direction to move in, we have to look at the facts, one of which is that public figures are human and have all the same needs, wants, habits, and flaws as the rest of us.

One other thing: every once in a while, someone new will come to BlueHampshire and complain that this group is hostile to views not shared by its large majority, and that anything else is suppressed.  The civility everyone has shown me in this thread proves otherwise.


Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox