Skip to comments.DOJ Tries To Seize Control Of Public Records Arbitration
Posted on 04/25/2012 8:21:24 AM PDT by jazusamo
In a dangerous power grab that will jeopardize government transparency, the Obama Justice Department wants to redefine federal public record law so that it becomes the sole arbiter in disputes between agencies and individuals who submit requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
The unprecedented move would give the Department of Justice (DOJ), an extension of the executive branch, scary authority to determine if and how public records are disseminated throughout government. It would also strip those duties from the agency Office of Government Information Services (OGIS)that was created by Congress as a neutral party to mediate FOIA disputes and assure compliance among all federal agencies.
This is not the sort of story youll see in the mainstream media since, not surprisingly, the Obama Administration is keeping it under the radar. However, Judicial Watch has obtained an inside congressional document outlining the DOJs unscrupulous plot to become FOIA ombudsman. It comes from one of the most influential and powerful chambers in the U.S. House of Representatives, the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
In a letter addressed to Attorney General Eric Holder, the California congressman who chairs the Oversight and Government Reform Committee (Darrell Issa) says the proposed modification will have a negative impact on government transparency. The letter also requests documents involving efforts to modify OGISs statutorily established FOIA dispute resolution authority by shifting the duties to the DOJ. Holder has until this week to comply with the committees request.
The House investigative committee also reminds Holder that the DOJs proposal to become the referee for public records disputes clearly contradicts Congresss intent and is an apparent contravention of FOIA law. DOJ has important but limited statutory responsibilities concerning the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the letter says. These responsibilities include making information about agency FOIA programs publicly available; issuing recommendations and guidelines to agency FOIA offices, and encouraging agency FOIA compliance. DOJs responsibilities under FOIA, however, do not include offering dispute resolution services between agencies and FOIA requesters.
Congress created the OGIS more than four years ago as a crucial neutral party that offers a range of mediation services to resolve public records disputes and to assure government-wide compliance. The agency, which is headquartered at the U.S. National Archives, has had tremendous success, directly helping resolve more than 1,200 FOIA disputes from virtually every state. No wonder Issa asks Holder to reconsider the proposed modification and comply with current law.
NAZI Germany will have had NOTHING on Marxist America. With Obama behind the stick and Holder in the jump seat, you can bet your hindquarters that they’ll be going after whitey.
:: (OGIS)that was created by Congress ::
It would seem to me that to propose that the authority of the OGIS be altered would be [that proposal] a violation of the law.
Leftist power grab number 52....
Obama Justice Department wants to redefine federal public record law so that it becomes the sole arbiter in disputes between agencies and individuals who submit requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
Well, isn't that just so special.
The communist agenda "democrats" have just reinvented the "Political Bureau of the Central Committee" to invoke the practice used by communist parties worldwide.
(from the source...)
"Democratic centralism is the name given to the principles of internal organization used by Leninist political parties, and the term is sometimes used as a synonym for any Leninist policy inside a political party. The democratic aspect of this organizational method describes the freedom of members of the political party to discuss and debate matters of policy and direction, but once the decision of the party is made by majority vote, all members are expected to uphold that decision. This latter aspect represents the centralism. As Lenin described it, democratic centralism consisted of "freedom of discussion, unity of action."
. inside a political party
I’m not clear on this as to whether DOJ is proposing to change the law or redefine it, it sounds like they want to redefine it without the approval of Congress. As you say, I would think that would be a violation of law.
Yes, it's special but not surprising for the executive branch of Obama and thugs only choosing to enforce or recognize laws which they agree with.
Another step in declaring his sole control of the USA.
He must be stopped.
The law? Haahahahahhaa
Oh that's too good! Hahahahahahahahah.
Beware citizen or you may slip into questioning the validity of executive orders.
“Im not clear on this as to whether DOJ is proposing to change the law or redefine it, it sounds like they want to redefine it without the approval of Congress. As you say, I would think that would be a violation of law.”
In a normal universe what you stated would be expected to be true.
However, with an administration openly admitting to using executive orders to go around congress, claiming the USSC does not have authority to rule on laws of congress, giving the Secret Service the authority to outlaw First Amendment protection of political speech, and even admitting they would ignore the USSC should they rule against the king in the Arizona case, I would say we are no longer in a logical universe and certainly are no longer governed by a Constitutionally limited Federal government.
Again, by using only the messiah’s own words, we seem to be in a dictatorship run by a person of questionable; citizenship, loyalty, constitutional awareness, and certainly character.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.