Too quiet for our own good

Lon Snowden, (R), the father of fugitive former U.S. intelligence contractor Edward Snowden, is interviewed by Reuters in Washington August 7, 2013. Snowden says he hopes to visit Russia this month to finally see his son after an asylum battle that pitted Washington against Moscow and try to arrange legal representation in the United States to fight espionage charges. Lon Snowden's attorney, Bruce Fein (2ndR), listens as Reuters reporters Phil Stewart (L) and Toby Zakaria (2ndL) interview Snowden.
GARY CAMERON | Reuters
Lon Snowden, (R), the father of fugitive former U.S. intelligence contractor Edward Snowden, is interviewed by Reuters in Washington August 7, 2013. Snowden says he hopes to visit Russia this month to finally see his son after an asylum battle that pitted Washington against Moscow and try to arrange legal representation in the United States to fight espionage charges. Lon Snowden's attorney, Bruce Fein (2ndR), listens as Reuters reporters Phil Stewart (L) and Toby Zakaria (2ndL) interview Snowden.
Posted Aug. 08, 2013, at 12:34 p.m.

On Wednesday, the Obama administration released documents on the National Security Agency’s information-gathering. It should not have taken high-profile leaks to prod the government to reveal what it can, nor should it in the future.

It’s true that anything but total transparency will inevitably leave out details about the value and drawbacks of any program, offering Americans a distorted view of the government’s work. But it is good for Americans to know as much as they can about what the government is doing in their name.

Take, for example, the bulk collection of phone metadata that leaker Edward Snowden revealed, which relies on a novel interpretation of the Patriot Act’s Section 215. Why did that interpretation need to remain secret once the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court accepted it?

The public should have more access to significant interpretations of national security law, and the Obama administration can institutionalize that principle without any action from Congress.

The government could also, without legislation, report more on the scope of its information-gathering efforts. Google, Microsoft and other tech giants have asked for permission to disclose more about how many data requests they get from the government. If the Obama administration thinks allowing that would risk indicating which companies cooperate with the government, and therefore which ones terrorists should avoid using, it should beef up its own reporting. Releasing general, nationwide data on how many times the government goes looking for information under its various authorities would inform the public without tipping off terrorists.

There are many other options to promote accountability. The inspectors general who watch the NSA and its interactions with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court could produce regular, unclassified reports outlining the broad features of government anti-terror efforts and any misuse. The president’s Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board could play a similar role.

President Barack Obama shouldn’t wait for Congress; he can institute stronger transparency requirements immediately.

The Washington Post (Aug. 1)

http://bangordailynews.com/2013/08/08/opinion/too-quiet-for-our-own-good/ printed on August 21, 2014