More on Proposed Cut to Ombudsman by Bush

The Washington Post is reporting the White House's reaction to its proposed move of the FOIA Ombudsman's Office to the Department of Justice.  A spokesman named Tony Fratto said that the Bush administration strongly supports "the timely and fair resolution of FOIA requests" but that "only the Department of Justice, as the government's lead on FOIA issues and mediation in legal matters, is properly situated and empowered to mediate issues between requesters and the federal government."

I've been working in FOIA for over 15 years and have never heard of Tony Fratto--I doubt he knows anything about the FOIA process, because if he did, he would never make the above statement.  That is because the inherent conflict that Department of Justice has in mediating FOIA disputes, when it makes FOIA policy and litigates FOIA lawsuits on behalf of government agencies, makes the above statement laughable.

On another note, the Post reports that Open Government groups are preparing a letter to send to Congress protesting the move of the Ombudsman's Office to Justice. 

So even though the FOIA legislation has been passed and signed into law, it is far from done.  Maybe now Congress will reopen the issue and specifically overturn the Ashcroft memorandum and fund agency FOIA operations--like they should have done originally.

Comments

[JW]

Bush league move.

[Charis Wilson]

He's a public relations mouthpiece, nothing more.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060926-2.html

[FOIA Friend]

I knew they had a plan to thwart it when the administration didn't have it removed as part of the compromise language. I'd say that NARA is less under the political thumb than the DOJ political and government puppets (does the need to pay a mortgage really justify the ethical issues of endorsing by signature something that circumvents a law? Let the politicals sign it). If the Ombudsman is over at NARA - DOJ will have to get in line with what is resolved by mediation. And the Ombudsman also can issue FOIA processing and appeal guidance. The solution is for DOJ to undertake massive CPR training of its staff...and abide by the law.

[JW]

FOIA Friend is seriously mistaken if he/she thinks that NARA will be able to dictate anything to DOJ re: FOIA. Under the statute, NARA's authorities are purely advisory. Indeed, although NARA must offer mediation, agencies are not required to participate. More important, because DOJ represents agencies in litigation, its viewpoint on FOIA will necessarily trump that of NARA's.

[FOIA Friend]

Under JW's scenario - why is the Administration interested in moving the Ombudsman office out of NARA if it can be so easily ignored? And he/she has described a likely backup plan should the administration's non-funding ploy fail: intimidate or retaliate against agencies that participate in mediation instead of litigation. And, until a FOIA results in litigation, DOJ will not know whether their viewpoint has trumped a NARA viewpoint. JW's insight is very much appreciated.

[JW]

No reason for DOJ to discourage agencies from participating in mediation. Agencies already realize that in most cases, mediation will be a fruitless enterprise to be avoided. Whether an exemption applies is simply not conducive to mediation. Search issues perhaps, but that's about it.

[RM]

Have to side with FOIA Friend on this one. Congress has certainly recognized DOJ's inherent conflict of interest here. It is inconceivable that the administration, now, is attempting to shift responsibility away from NARA -- where it quite clearly belongs.