Opinion: Freedom from scrutiny

Buried in last year's Homeland Security Act is a dangerous provision that puts vital public safety information out of public reach. The law creates an exemption to the Freedom of Information Act for information on critical infrastructure submitted to the government by private industry.

As originally conceived, the provision was a way to encourage private industry to be candid when describing its own vulnerabilities. But the exemption is so broadly written it gives industry an opportunity to hide self-incriminating evidence of safety and environmental dangers.

Most of the nation's critical infrastructure -- power plants, nuclear facilities, chemical companies and computer networks -- are owned by the private sector. To be able to evaluate the extent of the risks to these interests, the government must be informed of the soft spots. A narrow exemption to FOIA to encourage companies to describe fully the hazards that exist might have been warranted; a proposal to this effect was offered by the Senate but was rejected by the House and White House. Instead, what passed was a broadly written exemption that gives companies the ability to shelter information about a safety or environmental hazard simply by labeling it sensitive and submitting it to the government. The law goes far beyond normal FOIA exemptions by making leaks from a government whistle-blower a criminal offense.

By placing information regarding industry practices out of reach of regulators and public interest groups, the law will stymie safety enforcement mechanisms, potentially putting employees and communities at risk. Using national security as an excuse, the law gives companies the ability to insulate themselves from a degree of government and public oversight. In the long run, this will do far more to undermine public safety than promote it.

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright