How does the US government justify the withholding of information from US citizens? What is the longest period of time that the US government can withhold information its citizens? Does each agency develop their own criteria or is there generally several universal rationales?
First define what specifically is being withheld, and that will give you insight as to why it is secret.
Should all of our battle plans be Public Knowledge before we attack? If so, then aren’t we Complete Fucking Morons who deserve to lose? Likewise should all of our military hardware have manuals you can buy at Barnes & Noble? If we are developing new hardware, who really needs to know?
If we’re investigating a criminal or terrorist organization, shouldn’t we be keeping a huge amount of that information secret? If not, would it be any wonder that the investigation fails and all our agents are killed off?
The bottom line is that it is not in anyone’s best interests for all knowledge to be public, and there is no Constitutional Right to know everything, or indeed anything in particular.
The courts have generally been very deferential to Executive Branch claims of secrecy when national security is at issue. The Constitution specifically requires that all public expenditures be a matter of public record, for example, but the Supreme Court held in the early 1980s that no one has standing to enforce that provision as to the budget of the intelligence community. Despite successive waves of declassification, there are still “sources and methods” secrets being kept about the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, incredibly enough. That’s about the oldest still-classified data I know of.
By executive order, President Clinton established a presumption that all government info should be declassified after 20 years, IIRC, but President G.W. Bush revoked it. I remember reading that President Obama was considering returning to the Clinton standard, but I don’t know for sure if that’s been done.
In the broadest terms, there are two kinds of non-public information: classified and other.
Classified information is governed by executive order. Here is the latest version of the EO. It defines what can be classified and what the different classification levels mean. Generally, this information relates to defense, intelligence, foreign affairs, or foreign trade.
There’s also other information not released to the public. Try googling the Privacy Act of 1974 for one example. It says that the government can’t arbitrarily release details of your life without good reason or your permission. I don’t believe death automatically allows a government agency to release your information, but it has been a while since I’ve really dealt with the Privacy Act. The Freedom of Information Act also includes a number of categories of information that are not subject to FOIA. See here.
You can start with Closed Sessions of Congressand work backward to find a lot of info regarding this
We’ve had the Freedom of Information Law in effect in this country since 1966, which says that unless there’s a reason for the government to keep something secret, it must be made available to the public. There have been many amendments to it over the years, most of which have expanded the scope if what’s available.
As a longtime reporter, it’s my view that our governments generate more output than anyone can possibly consume. The amount that is kept secret probably constitutes 0.000000000001% of the whole.
Census information at the individual level is kept private for 75 years, by law.
So, yes, while there are overall guidelines for classifications like “secret” for intelligence gathering, there are other reasons and purposes that governments keep information out of public view and for those reasons each agency does essentially set its own rules. (Congress may or may not pass legislation to control this in any specific case.)
The presumption is normally that information should be public unless there is good reason for it not to be. Lots of good reasons do exist. Lots of the reasons that exist are not good ones, of course. But that doesn’t mean every one is bad.
Very accurate post, along with what everyone else has said. What you say about the bad reasons are sad, but a necessary evil. There must be a system in place to classify and secure information, and this system seems to inevitably bring about overclassification.
If we plowed through all of our classified information, there is certainly a good chunk that one could argue does not need to be classified. Lord knows, when I’m producing a brief, it may have fifty unclass things in it, and just one secret item. The whole brief then becomes secret. Or, if in doubt, I classify it. This leads to a ton of overclassification, but there’s really not much that can be done about it. And that doesn’t even get into the question you alluded to–why things are classified at a particular level. I’ve read reams of classified info that I’m pretty sure wouldn’t cause serious or grave damage to our security.
ETA: Just to cover my ass, I should add that even though I think this, I’d never compromise any of the information.
Perhaps some of our spies in Cuba from the time are still alive? Revealing their names would be rather fatal, don’t you think? And even if they’re not alive, perhaps they recruited others who are.
I think there should be representative members of the public who should be allowed to see anything, and decide for us whether the people’s interests outweigh “National Security”.
The evil’s that can be done in the name of secrecy, far outweigh the good, imho.
And how do you propose that these people keep secret what is in the interests of “National Security”? Have you ever told a secret to a friend with the condition that they don’t tell anybody else? If not, do it tomorrow and see how long it lasts. You’ll hear it again from somebody in less than a week, I can all but guarantee it. It’s absolutely predictable.
People are not good at keeping secrets, because it is human nature to demonstrate that they know something that nobody else knows. So, how do you keep someone from disseminating information judged to be in the interests of national security? You give them a security clearance and impose penalties for disclosure. Which, of course, makes them no more or less than a government employee, thus negating the type of oversight you’re asking for.
Nonsense. What do you think the government is hiding from you other than sources and methods or capabilities? All of those are protected so that people don’t get killed because some schmuck decided to make an offhand comment to demonstrate his importance.
A couple other things that are (justifiably) secret, but not classified:
Medical records (military personnel, civilians who for one reason or another get medical care from the government)
Criminal and civil investigations (while they’re underway)
Confidential business information obtained during an investigation/licensing/approval
Strategy documents, etc. for legal proceedings
You should perhaps re-think using the term “secret” next to “not classified.” Secret = classified, in the eyes of the government.
In fact, certain members of the appropriate Congressional committees (or sometimes just the majority leader/speaker) are briefed on large numbers of things that are otherwise classified. There are almost no cases of these classified briefings ever becoming public. It’s much more likely that someone from the Executive branch will strategically leak classified material than the few representatives who gain knowledge of it.
There are several problems with this system. Not all classified information must be given over to Congress. The right information is not always given over. And even if it is, it can’t be used without revealing it. That makes not for good oversight or good law but for the endless rounds of “You were briefed. No we weren’t.” that we saw under Bush.
At best, since the senior members of both parties must be included in these briefings, some outside advice may be received. But briefings are often held under an information only, no questions mandate so even this doesn’t work well.
I can’t agree with ivan that members of the public should be chosen to decide. We already have a system in which elected leaders are given committee mandates to become experts on certain areas and then are able to receive classified information. That’s obviously superior, even with all its flaws, in a representative democracy.
P.S. quick note on flyboy’s post. Secret does equal classified. But private is separate. Census information is private, not secret or classified.
For Dopers who are interested in this subject matter, let me recommend: Bomb Power by Garry Wills. His premise is that the government’s penchant for secrecy was a consequence of the Manhattan Project. I think he makes a compelling argument in the book and I highly recommend it to interested readers. Really fascinating and well-written. And I just finished it, so it’s relatively fresh on the brain (must recommend before I forg… what was I typing about?)
People really need to get over talking about the “government” as if it were a singular entity. We’re not. We’re a collection of citizens. I can’t see what flyboy is working on because I don’t have the necessary need-to-know. Airman Doors can’t come into my workspace because he’s not authorized to do so.
So it really makes no sense to say “the government knows” something or even “the FBI knows” because it’s too big an organization for that big of a generalization.
Let me also point out that I have access to some sensitive systems. But if I pull up information that’s not in line with my direct job duties, I can be terminated and have my clearance revoked. It happens every once in a while. People decide to look at the flight records of celebrities or search the name of some presidential candidate. They get flagged and fired immediately. It’s absolutely career-ending. So it’s rarely done.
Bottom line: A lot of Dopers work for the government. It doesn’t mean we know jack-all about you and yours.
Indeed. “Confidential” is a better term to use for SSNs, medical records, and things like that. Other things that are private but aren’t legally classified are termed “sensitive”. The legal records I’m working on right now, for instance, are just sensitive, not classified. I could print them out, carry them on the subway, toss them in the garbage at home, leave them on my home coffee table, etc. If it were Secret, all of those things would get me in a lot of trouble.
Exapno Mapcase, it’s 72 years, not 75 years.
Indeed. Just be sure you don’t leave them behind on a train: Exclusive: New batch of terror files left on train | The Independent | The Independent
So, there’s no truth to the idea that even world leaders are steered politely away from areas of interest that are deemed to be “Need To Know” material, and that your own president for example, could be given the runaround until he was old, grey and senile, before he’d gain access to certain “Confidential” files?
Could someone please provide a link or explain the differences between 'secret, ‘classified’, ‘confidential’, etc?