Blog

Buffalo News — Pass the shield law

Congress needs to follow states in protecting flow of information

The Buffalo (N.Y.) News
August 2, 2008

Once again, Senate Republicans have blocked legislation that would protect reporters and the public from the threat posed by a secretive federal government

Congress needs to follow states in protecting flow of information

The Buffalo (N.Y.) News
August 2, 2008

Once again, Senate Republicans have blocked legislation that would protect reporters and the public from the threat posed by a secretive federal government. This time, opponents claim, the reason is to force action on domestic oil and gas production, as though one had anything to do with the other.

Either way, federal law continues to threaten reporters with jail if they refuse to disclose sources. Although the House overwhelmingly approved a bill similar to the Senate’s proposed shield law last year, some Senate Republicans continue to stall the measure in their chamber even after its language was altered to accommodate concerns regarding terrorism and classified information.

Most states, including New York, have shield laws that allow reporters to do their legitimate work without worrying that they will be forced to identify confidential sources. Most members of Congress, in both chambers and of both parties, favor a federal shield law. Yet it continues not to happen, even when senators of good faith in this case Charles Schumer, D-NY, and Arlen Specter, R-Pa. broker changes designed to assuage the concerns of opponents.

In the end, this may not matter for more than a few months. The Congress elected this November is likely to understand the important public need served by this law, and both presidential candidates have said they favor a shield law.

Still, it’s hard not to wonder why so many Republicans including the one in the White House are so set against this law. It’s not much of stretch to conclude that it has something to do with the nature of the Bush administration, the most secretive in decades.

This, after all, is the president who began his administration by putting records of his father and President Reagan off limits. It is the administration that controls information by doctoring scientific research reports to suit its partisan needs. It is the administration whose first attorney general, John Ashcroft, instructed workers to look for ways to thwart freedom of information requests.

Why would such an administration, or its fawning admirers in Congress, ever agree to a law that protects those who report its secrets? Without such protection, sources know reporters can be pressured to talk. It helps keep people with stories to tell in line, where the administration wants them. Even when the public needs and deserves that information on how its elected government is working.

Schumer said he will try again in September to pass this measure. We hope the effort succeeds, but in all honesty, that hope seems small. Maybe next year.

Archive

Contributors