My experience in using the FOIA to obtain government docu

ments has involved requests to most major federal agencies.

The greatest number of requests have been filed with the Depart

ments of Defense, Interior and Justice.

In general, I have been granted partial or complete access

to about half of the records I requested.

Following administra

tive appeals, I have been granted access to about a fourth of

the other half of those requested records.

In addition, I and my news organization have filed five

FOIA Lawsuits in the United States District Court for the Dis

trict of Columbia seeking access to what we believe to be improperly suppressed public records. In one case, Taylor v. Depart

ment of the Interior (Civ. No. 80-1834), the Court sustained

our motion for summary judgement on 19 June 1981 after deciding

records concerning mineral leasing activities on Indian Lands

and money held in trust for Indians by the government were improp

erly withheld under Exemption Four [5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)].

Four other cases, involving lawsuits against the Departments

of the Army, Navy and Air Force over the withholding of unclassi

fied readiness reports under the First Exemption [5 U.S.C. 552(b)(1)],

are still pending.

2

The FOIA has been invaluable in furtherence of the public's

right to know about the government's operations by giving me an

additional tool to obtain information that otherwise would have

been inaccessable.

Here are just a few of the subjects I have

been able to report thoroughly solely because of the existence

of the FOIA:

---Stories exposing hidden details of the My Lai Massacre

and other war crimes in Vietnam which shed new light on the

Army's cover-ups and on complicity by the Central Intelligence

Agency.

---Stories exposing for the first time the human tragedy

known as 'Operation KEELHAUL,' the forcible repatriation of

anti-Soviet Russian prisoners of war and displaced persons after World War II, a closely guarded secret for thirty (30) years. ---A story listing for the first time every loan made by

the billion dollar-plus Teamsters Central States, Southeast and

Southwest Areas Pension Fund, often called the Mafia's 'bank.'

--A series of articles detailing for the first time shame

ful mismanagement, massive waste and widespread corruption in the administration of federal Indian programs.

---Most recently, a series of articles providing an in

depth look at the 'unprepared' condition of United States mil

itary readiness.

Reprints of the Indian and military series are attached

for the subcommittee's information.

As a frequent user of the FOIA, it has been my experience

that the law's effectiveness has been generally impaired by Loopholes and procedural delays restricting the free flow of information and thwarting timely release of documents. reminded of the statement in late 1972 by Professor Lloyd C.

I am

Gardner, chairman of the history department at Rutgers Univer

sity, after being frustrated for 10 years in his efforts to ob

tain documents pertaining to the origins of the Korean War, a

statement I consider perfectly appropriate today:

For misdirection, subtrefuge and circumlocution there has been nothing like this bureaucratic performance since the old-fashioned shell game.

When I testified about the FOIA before another Congression

al subcommittee in 1974, I stated that in my opinion there are four critical weaknesses in the FOIA. Although the 1975 Amend

ments to the FOIA addressed some of those perceived weaknesses,

currently proposed Amendments which would have the effect of

watering down or gutting the FOIA make my previous statment

4

worth repeating today:

The first involves the broad exemptions which create enough loopholes that a determined boreaucrat can withhold practically any document he wants from the public by claiming it fits into one of the general categories of exempt material.

The second involves the lack of any compulsion for judicial review of material said to be classified in the interests of national security or foreign policy.

The third involves the lack of any requirement to respond to requests for information and records within a reasonable length of time, permitting unnecessary footdragging and deliberate delays.

var

Finally, the fourth involves the lack of precise limitations on the type and amount of fees that may be assessedy leading to a iety of disparities within the federal agencies and an ability to charge high research fees that are not really cost-related.

There have been at least sixty-five (65) bills introduced

in the

current session of Congress that affect the gathering and

publication of news. Twenty (20) of these bills involve a con

certed effort to mutilate the FOIA by extending the time limits

to as much as one year; by exempting completely such records as FBI investigatory files, whether or not cases are closed; by exempting completely Indian-related records; by exempting com

pletely CIA and intelligence information; by exempting any infor

mation submitted by businesses if it is merely received by a

government agency already stamped 'Confidential' by business;

and by such privacy amendments that even welfare records would

be sealed.

The trend toward more secrecy in government is a throw

back to the days before the FOIA when government was Less
accountable, and, consequently, less responsive to the needs
of the public. If any of the proposed amendments to the FOIA
become law, it will be the public that will suffer the most.
In the final analysis, the interests of the governed are not
best served by looking solely to the interests of the governors.

Mr. POLK. I appreciate that very much. It has been submitted. Mr. ANDERSON. I agree with Mr. Taylor. I think he has hit the point that has bothered us. I, like Mr. Polk, do not use the Freedom of Information Act on a regular routine basis and I say the reason I do not is that I deal in news and news is perishable and it takes too long to get the documents out of the Freedom of Information Act. I can also testify that in fact in order to get documents through the Freedom of Information Act, I sometimes find it necessary to enter into quiet conspiracy with sources of mine within the Government and they will channel it through the Freedom of Information Act. It is almost as surreptitious as getting a secret document in a back alley because it sometimes becomes that difficult again because of their arbitrary powers to decide, using the various clauses and loopholes available to them, to decide what to release and what not to release.

Mr. ENGLISH. Mr. Anderson, and Mr. Polk, do you find that there is a great variance from agency to agency, department to department, as to the way the Freedom of Information Act is administered or do you find that it is administered consistently throughout the Government?

Mr. ANDERSON. It varies with agencies and individuals.

Mr. ENGLISH. So you have each agency making its own interpretation and deciding on its own to what extent it is going to cooperate with the intent of the Freedom of Information Act, is that correct?

Mr. ANDERSON. That is correct. It has been my experience that those hardnosed individuals or agencies can find ways to obstruct you from getting almost any papers they do not want you to read.

Mr. POLK. I agree. It varies with agencies, with individuals particularly and from time to time with changes of administration which are simply changes of individuals. That law is so flexible it can be used to frustrate or to serve the public.

Mr. ENGLISH. Is this an area you feel this committee should focus its attention on strengthening so you would have consistent inter