Arizona Republic — Kyl: Secrecy's champion

• By: ASNE staff
• On: 10/05/2007 18:11:58
• In: Shield law editorials

The Arizona Republic, Phoenix
Oct. 3, 2007

Senator Secrecy.

That's the reputation Arizona's Sen. Jon Kyl has earned in Washington, where he too often puts the interests of the bureaucracy ahead of citizens' need to know what their government is doing.

He did it again last week. He's likely to do it again this week.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is debating a bill to shield reporters' confidential sources from the prying eyes of lazy prosecutors and civil attorneys. It contains a number of balancing tests so that in instances such as a specific terrorism threat or harm to national security, a reporter would still be required to identify a source.

But that wasn't good enough for Kyl. He called the bill a "draconian" act that would cause "severe and grave harm to our national security."

His solution: Require journalists to reveal the source of any leak of classified information.

It wouldn't matter if the information were improperly classified, had nothing to do with national security or if its publication exposed government corruption or wrongdoing. Kyl wants to plug leaks.

What public official would risk his career to reveal dubious activities knowing his or her name would certainly be revealed? There would be no one left to blow the whistle on outrages such as those at Walter Reed or Abu Ghraib. Kyl's amendment was an invitation to bureaucrats to keep the Top Secret stamp inked, knowing they could hide any embarrassment, cover up any abuse of power.

The judiciary committee recognized the dangers in Kyl's proposal, rejecting it 13-6.

Kyl defended his amendment as seeking to make the bill better. "I'm interested in trying to have a good law that protects national security and the reporter's privilege," he said. But the balance he uses tips to keeping more secrets, not shedding more light.

That's why it is worrisome that he and his allies have 10 more amendments they'll offer Thursday. One would deny protection of confidential sources for a reporter who committed a crime, something the bill already does. The other nine? Kyl won't say what they include.

In a perfect world, confidential sources would never be necessary. But this is not a perfect world, and those who abuse power will draw the shades against disinfecting sunlight. Confidential sources can expose the corrupt.

Today, whistle-blowers take a chance anytime they talk to a reporter. At least 40 reporters have been subpoenaed or questioned about confidential sources in recent years.

In the past month, six reporters were ordered to reveal their sources in a civil suit filed by Stephen Hatfill, identified as a person of interest in the 2001 anthrax attacks.

When neither reporter nor whistle-blower can trust a promise of confidentiality, the public conversation is diminished. We cannot debate what we do not know about.

The Free Flow of Information Act strikes the right balance between legitimate government interests and an informed public.

That's why Republicans Arlen Specter and Richard Lugar joined Democrats Chris Dodd and Charles Schumer in championing this bill.

A companion bill passed the House Judiciary Committee without dissent. The Senate bill should win committee approval, but it is unlikely to be unanimous.

Senator Secrecy has shown he'd rather protect bureaucrats and leave citizens in the dark. You'd think a senator from a state blessed with sunshine would know better.