Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

In 2001, * reversed the right of public access to presidential papers.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-17-07 12:45 PM
Original message
In 2001, * reversed the right of public access to presidential papers.
What did he know then, what was he trying to or expecting to hide? For a man and admin who seem to have no foresight, he sure tried/tries to cover his ass.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/17/opinion/17sun2.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Presidential Stone Walls
Published: June 17, 2007

The template for the Bush administration’s mania for secrecy was signed by the president six years ago — Executive Order 13233, reversing the presumption of right of public access to presidential papers. This basic right of taxpayers and historians alike was embedded in the 1978 laws enacted after the Nixon administration. The reforms established a reasonable 12-year waiting period for access. But Mr. Bush’s reversal lets presidents or vice presidents (guess who?) keep their records sealed in perpetuity unless they or their heirs approve access.

Fortunately, Congress is in the process of demonstrating that such hermetic devotion to secrecy has no place in a democracy. Mr. Bush’s order would be rescinded by a proposal approved overwhelmingly in the House in March and now making its way to passage in the Senate. The White House, of course, is vowing to veto any final bill. So it is important that the Senate re-establish the public’s obvious right to historical transparency with the same veto-proof support achieved in the House.

Otherwise, Mr. Bush’s dictum will stand, with no explanation required for denying requests, nor any appeal allowed. The executive order leaves a costly, lengthy lawsuit as Americans’ only avenue of possible redress.

Hiding secrets and embarrassments may be a predictable part of a politician’s instinct for survival. But attempting to enshrine this instinct timelessly is a stain on the Constitution and an insult to history. The administration insists that only 64 of more than two million pages have been sealed thus far. They would be a good place to start reading once Congress re-establishes the public’s right to know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-17-07 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
1. Everything must be exposed. Every document made public. Every dungeon excavated.
A thousand years of sunlight may not be enough to disinfect the corruption that chokes our system of government. No possible effort to dig out the rottenness can be spared.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-17-07 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yep, and he sealed Poppy's papers too!
At the time, I figured he made that ex. order to protect Poppy from unknown BS from Iran Contra. Now, I'm not so sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-17-07 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Didn't he seal Clinton's papers
I read an interesting article about that and that it was possibly a motivating factor in what Sandy Berger did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-17-07 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Yes, I believe all Presidential papers from Poppy on, which
of course includes Clinton. I think Clinton objected but, as usual, Shrub wouldn't budge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-17-07 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
3. Serial killer has also tried to destroy FOIA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-17-07 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
4. They have left no stone unturned while they were in the planning stages
of this coup. None.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-17-07 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
7. You know that this was a directive straight from the dick.
Illegal elections, and illegal occupation of office, needs much attention to secrecy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CGowen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-17-07 02:10 PM
Response to Original message
8. A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-17-07 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
9. I think he was hiding plans that were hatched when Poppy Bush was
president. Think about it. Rumsferrata and co., pretty much went ahead with plans that were poo-poo'd in the early 90s. And worse, they did nasty things that they wanted no one to know about.

White men have lots of secrets. That's why they appear to be so effective in positions of leadership. They know how to hide their mistakes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NobleCynic Donating Member (991 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 12:38 AM
Response to Original message
10. I think this might have more to do with Reagan than Bush
And which term of Reagan's presidency he was diagnosed with Alzheimer's in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 01:56 AM
Response to Original message
11. Could a Democratic President un-do this?
Should I ask Ralph "They're All the Same" Nader?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC