I agree with Gregory Hom’s submission (“Citizens
need to demand more openness from leaders,” April 3) and
would like to elaborate historically on the federal
government’s violations of truthful public disclosure.
Arguably since the 1960s the executive branch under both Democratic
and Republican administrations has been unchecked and
unbalanced.
The Freedom of Information Act was passed in response to the
most serious of these violations.
In 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson got Congressional approval
by deceiving Congress regarding the provocative nature of American
naval maneuvers off the coast of Vietnam. This false
characterization led to our longest war and the greatest number of
American casualties since World War II.
And while Johnson was passing the Civil Rights Act, the Voting
Rights Act and his “War on Poverty” legislation,
another part of the executive branch was spying on one of the
United States’ most heroic civilian leaders.
Namely, the FBI was secretly spying on Martin Luther King Jr.
and his Civil Rights Movement. The agency also tried to intimidate
King by writing an anonymous letter to him suggesting he commit
suicide.
I shall refrain from elaborating on the most well-known of these
violations ““ which was Nixon’s cover-up in the
Watergate scandal ““ and skip to another violation that caused
violence. According to a BBC News article, in 1986 the Reagan
administration violated a Congressional resolution and
“secretly and illegally transferred to the (Nicaraguan)
contras the proceeds of clandestine sales of military equipment
supplied to Iran.”
Of these four incidents, only one of them resulted in the
removal of the violator in an attempt to hold the executive branch
accountable. For some decades now, the executive branch has
asserted the right to secretly disobey federal resolutions, to
overstep Constitutional limits, and to mislead the American
people.
As Hom noted, the current administration has ignored the
regulations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act with its
secret domestic spying program.
Ironically, while Bush has touted his intention to nominate
judicial candidates who do not legislate from the bench, it appears
that he believes the executive branch possesses the judicial
branch’s duty to interpret legislation. This
administration’s rather less-than-strict interpretations of
Senate Resolution 23 and House Resolution 64, which authorized the
president to conduct the U.S.-led war on terrorism, symbolizes the
branch’s ever-increasing power.
Many of our founding fathers would be rolling over in their
graves if they knew the federal government’s systematic
neglect of checks and balances, and Hom is absolutely correct in
advocating that the citizenry should demand more openness from its
leaders.
I want to end with the words of Benjamin Franklin, who said,
“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” In a
time of war, the public should never have to tolerate any president
who violates our freedom and civil liberties.
Gilde is a third-year history student.