The Politics of Government Email

[With this post, we welcome to our expanding circle of contributing writers Matthew Burton, who is one part tech advisor to the intelligence community, one part government reform advocate, and a recent graduate of New York University's Interactive Telecommunications Program. He made a splash earlier this year with a long essay called "Why I Help 'The Man' and Why You Should Too," arguing that open source developers should roll up their sleeves and help make government more tech savvy and efficient. We're looking forward to his contributions. The editors.]

A federal judge on Monday ruled in favor of transparency groups in their pursuit to acquire internal White House emails from 2003-2005. The emails in question are stored on backup tapes that, due to the White House's inadequate storage system, were recycled several times, resulting in the loss of up to 5 million internal emails.

Internal emails played crucial roles in multiple Bush Administration scandals, including Hurricane Katrina, the federal prosecutor firings, and the Valerie Plame affair.

Due to the ruling, the tapes will now be turned over to the National Archives upon Bush's exit, where they will be subject to FOIA.

Meredith Fuchs, the General Counsel of the National Security Archive (one of the plaintiffs), said this ruling will set a precedent for White House email transparency. "Number one, this ruling means that the Obama Administration needs to be conscious of having good records practices, because they will be subject to suit as well if they don't do the right thing. Also, it squarely rejects the notion that the public does not have a right to the see (internal White House) emails."

Email disclosure is useful not just for the sake of transparency, but for history as well. "Before e-mail, events and meetings were formalized in memos and letters," Fuchs said. Only official meetings were logged, while casual conversations were lost to history. But emails expose the decisionmaking processes of presidents, at both their best moments and their worst. As interesting as Katrina emails are today, they may be even moreso 50 years from now.

One problem: according to Fuchs, those meeting memos "were generally maintained in an organized manner," while emails "have rarely been properly managed." That is especially true of the tapes in question, where emails have been stored in .pst format, making them difficult to sort through. In order for the National Archives to disclose the tapes' contents, they'll first have to find someone willing to fund their retrieval.

After a very confusing eight years, the White House still does not have a quality email backup system. (See the whole chronology here.) A ruling on a related lawsuit is expected Friday. That lawsuit concerns the disclosure of internal White House emails regarding the email backup problem.

0
Your rating: None
Categories: 

Comments

closing the barn door after the email escaped

So after losing 5M messages we now have a policy for the Executive to maintain email archives. Matthew, do you think we will have to step thru this same legal process for every new technology -- IM/twitter/yammer; Google docs/yahoo groups; Internal wikis; The Next Big Thing -- all of these will require robust archiving and retrieval, don't you think?

Dave Witzel
Senior Editor, Personal Democracy Forum
Charting the path from web 2.0 to democracy 2.0
email: dwitzel@policycommons.org
ph: 571.641.3029

preparing for future technologies

Good question, Dave. It's always safe to assume some amount of ineptitude when it comes to bureaucracies and systems, but I'm optimistic that the email saga won't be repeated to the same degree with future technologies. The main reason is that government is no longer ahead of the technology curve. The Pentagon created email, and it was used in the White House as far back as the Reagan Administration, long before third parties had vastly improved email search and storage. Now, any individual or organization can have a great storage system out of the box, which was not at all true 20 years ago. They had to build their own, and when a bureaucracy is left to building its own systems, bad things happen.

But from now on, I think that will be different. The public creates and adopts great communication technologies before bureaucracies do, so when the White House does catch on to them, at least it will be *possible* to do it right from the start.

Of course, my answer only accounts for tech issues, not for legal and political ones.