Skip to comments.

Posted on 11/16/2001 1:08:07 PM PST by classygreeneyedblonde

WASHINGTON -- It's easy to see why President Bush wants to keep his administration's current secrets, especially in wartime.

But why is he trying to hide historic White House documents of the Reagan administration that former President Ronald Reagan agreed in writing to release to the public

Reagan issued an order in 1989 that called for disclosure of most of his official papers 12 years after he left office. Until 1978 American presidents had complete control over the release of their internal communications

But after Watergate and the struggle with President Richard Nixon over the release of his records and tape recordings, Congress passed the 1978 Presidential Records Act, which provided for the release to the public of presidential papers 12 years after the chief executive leaves office.

Reagan's records were supposed to be released in January, and historians were eagerly awaiting them. But because of delays ordered by White House counsel Albert R. Gonzales, researchers and the public may never get to see them

Welcome to the handy excuse of "national security." It is being used to cover any past, current or future questionable government activities under a new order Bush has signed. The six-page document requires anyone seeking papers of past presidents and vice presidents to demonstrate a "specific need" for those papers before they can be produced. And any release then will be at the discretion of the sitting president -- even if a past president wants the information released. Bush's father was vice president under Reagan.

Amazingly, the current president's press secretary, Ari Fleischer, told reporters the aim of the order was to introduce an "orderly process" for releasing the documents. And Gonzalez said White House officials recognize "the importance, for historical reasons, of releasing as much information as we can." He even added that "there may be reasons that it's inappropriate or harmful to the country not to release certain information

Yet the order is clearly protective of the president's father and officials who are back at the White House in top jobs after serving in the Bush I administration between 1989 and 1993.

Gonzales said the order will put the incumbent president "in a better position to decide whether or not the release of documents of a former president does, in fact, jeopardize the national security of this country

Gonzales said anyone who would challenge a decision under the order could go to court. But he admitted that the legal battle would take years.

Thanks a lot.

Knowledge is power. Why shouldn't the American people know what was done in their name? Aren't presidents supposed to trust the public with the facts in an open and democratic society? Or am I dreaming?

Some 68,000 pages of confidential messages between Reagan and his advisers were closely reviewed by his presidential library staff and cleared for release. But now the White House has seen fit to put a permanent hold on their disclosure to the public

Remember the Iran-Contra scandal of the late 1980s in which Reagan's aides sold arms covertly to Iran and used the proceeds to illegally fund the Contra rebels in Nicaragua? It led to congressional hearings and criminal indictments that tainted the Reagan-Bush administration in its final years.

The new far-reaching order, obviously designed to block historic revelations, covers most records and state secrets in the White House files. You can be sure they will stay secret if this order is upheld in the courts. The Bush order declares that documents subject to release after 12 years that are not covered by "constitutionally-based privileges" will fall into the category of freedom-of-information requests. That will permit the Archivist of the United States to withhold them, too.

It's a shame that a former president will no longer have the last word on release of his official papers if the sitting president disagrees with the disclosure

The Bush order said that "absent compelling circumstances," the incumbent president or a future president would have the right to determine whether he or she agrees with the former president's decision.

Secrecy is endemic in government, but this order goes counter to the American tradition of government by the people and for the people

True, it's wartime and information is important. But so is truth, and trust is a two-way street

The American people have always been willing to give government the benefit of the doubt until those in charge lose their credibility. Witness the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal in which Lyndon B. Johnson and Nixon, respectively, lost the trust of the American people. Historians and writers are still digging out the deceptions of those eras

Is the Bush White House trying to protect the reputations of prominent political players -- especially George H. W. Bush -- through suppression of historic data? If so, that would deny the American people a chance to hold their past public servants accountable, albeit belatedly.

We have a right to know what our history is, warts and all

Helen Thomas is a columnist for Hearst Newspapers. E-mail: helent@hearstdc.com. Copyright 2001 Hearst Newspapers

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.