New spotlight on long campaign to gain public access to CRS reports
The New York Times covered the newest chapters in the long-standing effort to gain public access to the reports of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) in a story in its May 5 print edition. The Times story focused on the work done by the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) and others to replace the current patchwork distribution network with a policy to provide more comprehensive public access.
As the Times reported, Senators Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) and John McCain (R-AZ) introduced a resolution on April 30, S. Res. 118, to establish a distribution system that would provide public access to CRS reports and issue briefs via the websites of congressional members and committees. The CDT’s analysis of the resolution said a critical step the measure would mandate is the creation of a public index that would simplify the process of discovering reports and would “let the public know what their lawmakers are reading.” If enacted, the resolution would give the CRS Director the authority to limit the release of confidential information or material that is covered by copyright.
The resolution comes less than two months after Sen. Lieberman wrote to Senate Rules Committee Chairman Charles Schumer (D-NY) urging a more comprehensive system, and only weeks after CRS reports took first prize on the “Top Ten Most Wanted Government Documents” list compiled by CDT and OpenTheGovernment.org. The new resolution has generated enthusiasm among library organizations including the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) and the American Library Association (ALA).
Two years ago, Secrecy News highlighted the arguments made by CRS Director Daniel Mulhollan in favor or maintaining restricted access in an April 2007 memo to CRS staff:
“First, there is a danger that placing CRS in an intermediate position [between Congress and the public] would threaten the dialog on policy issues between Members and their constituents.
Second, the current judicial … perception of CRS as ‘adjunct staff’ of the Congress might be altered if CRS were seen as speaking directly to the public, putting at risk Speech or Debate Clause constitutional protections afforded the confidential work performed by this agency.
And third, if CRS products were routinely disseminated broadly to the public, over time these products might come to be written with a large public audience in mind and would no longer be focused solely on congressional needs.”
In his memo, Mulhollan said the prohibition against public dissemination of CRS products “is intended to preserve the role of CRS as a confidential resource.” But in practice, the bulk of these reports have always been readily available to those with the ability to pay for insider access through commercial vendors. The result is a distribution system giving well-heeled insiders privileged access to publicly funded research laying out congressional thinking on the critical issues of the day, an inequity that has long begged for reform. In a joint press release with Senator Lieberman, Senator McCain said “the American public paid for these valuable resources and has a right to benefit from them.”