REASONABLE FOI BILL NEEDED

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75B00380R000700010038-7
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 2, 2005
• Sequence Number: 38
• Publication Date: November 2, 1974
• Content Type: NSPR

r" ed or Re
Reasonable oI
b needed
By Paul A. Aliltich
,president:: Foldmss hoping that when
-- ?ress returns to C2- l Hill after the
ele ion, the lawniaLga &11 produce Free-
an
."*e existing Freedom of Information
Act went on the books in 1966. It gives
the public greater access to government
documents. It empowers the Federal courts
to -review agency decisions to withhold in-
formation and places on the government
the burden of providing that the withhold-
ing was proper.
The President recently vetoed a bill
aimed at strengthening the 1966 Freedom
of Information Act by providing for more
prompt, efficient and complete disclosure
of information. The President favored the
legislation in principle, but he found cer-
tain provisions in the bill unreasonable.
7n vatoino^ t1 ,ill, the President urged
-it along lines he was.
_r, and then return it to him
fey his. sigma ,,re.
The President wants stronger Freedom
of Information legislation-but he wants
legislation which is workable.
Critics of the President's veto have
taken the attitude that rejection of the
congressionally-passed freedom of infor-
mation bill is unthinkable. Well, it's true
that "freedom of information" is a catch
phrase. Who in a democracy is opposed to
freedom of information? Better you should
be against motherhood.
Let's take a good look at the.President's
reasons for vetoing the freedom of infor-
mation bill sent him by the Congress. He
i-tITOR & FunLI5liEri 2 NOV 1974
to_ examine agency recd d-s dirivately to
oc-
stitutional and unworkable. But he en-'
dorsed its main objectives.
Fully cognizant of the people's right to
know, the President stated in his veto
message: '_L sincerely hope t h a t thi 1egis-on- which has come so #ax toward eal-
iii ng its laudable goals, will bereenacted
'it^ lied
tome or signature du.riu>;.tltli_session of
Congress."
fled-sad at re i w the
j d e focused on the reasonableness of
t Under the new provision,
, on. the judge could overturn the agency's
classification simply because he found the
plaintiff's position just as reasonable.
The President fell: that-this provision
e s.
where they have no particular expertise."
As the provision now reads, the Presi-
dent said, agency decisions dealing-with
classification of documents would be given
less weight in the courts than agency de-
terminations involving routine regulatory
sident the
that
courts be given rgyjew Authority_ yer
d8asifie ,ion of documents_but that they
he required to uphoitl e a e is clla>ssifi-
ca Lion "if there is a reasonakle ass Jo
Sll1)P it."
Mr- Ford'ssecond objection to the vetoed
'bill was that- it would permit access I-
s law enforcement_ zn --tigatorv
files.
The President objected to an invasion of
the confidentiality of FBI files. He also
noted that our already overburdened law
enforcement agencies do not have the
numbers of personnel that would be needed
to make a line-by-line examination of each
individual public request for such infor-
mation.
The President proposed that more flex-
ible criteria govern such information re-
quests, so that responding to the requests
would not be so heavy a burden.
ssification de-
amounts to the initial cla
oniplex areas
Fiinallv. the President objected that the
vntned hill se un easona a time limits for
agencies to respond to requests or d-ocu-
nts--10 days to decide w ether .to
fur- nish the document. and 20 -days or._. 7-
istant to Pres- terminations dons on appeal.
this The time provision, Mr. Ford asserted,
hat the .rcgi-
t
or I
l Pt e5 19 808000700010038-7