![quote_3.jpg](http://img-ak.verticalresponse.com/email_layout/3407/quote_3.jpg?__nocache__=1)
"When Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Freedom of Information Act into law on July 4, 1966, the president, normally a fan of flashy signing ceremonies, did so unhappily in private."
|
In addition to (and perhaps because of) Louisiana's long legacy of colorful and compromised politicians — from the Longs and Edwin Edwards to Ray Nagin and David Vitter — one thing that made it a great place to be a journalist was its expansive public records law, with provisions on immediacy, exceptions and cost that, while not perfect, greatly favor public disclosure. It was quite a thing as a young reporter to march into the parish government, sheriff’s office or school system offices and request police reports, enrollment figures, budgets, resumes of candidates applying for government jobs and myriad other pieces of public information that had to be made available on the spot if they were readily accessible. Regrettably, records laws in the states I have worked in since, including Virginia, have failed to match up. You might not know that this has been Sunshine Week, a news industry initiative to promote the importance of access to public information.
Robert Zullo, Virginia Mercury
Perhaps the most important tool enabling Americans to ensure that their government is open and, therefore, accountable, is the Freedom of Information Act, a 52-year-old law that requires the federal government to release nonexempt information when it is requested. But despite FOIA’s power and importance, the administration of the law is deeply flawed. One major flaw in FOIA stems from charging the Justice Department with overseeing it. When Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Freedom of Information Act into law on July 4, 1966, the president, normally a fan of flashy signing ceremonies, did so unhappily in private, personally handwriting “no ceremony” in response to a memo suggesting a public event. At the suggestion of the Justice Department, Johnson added a signing statement that undercut the intent of the law with warnings about the danger of the disclosure of military secrets, investigative files, executive privilege and confidential advice.
Nate Jones, The Washington Post
|