MARILYN A. HARRIS, Executive Administrator and Professional Staff Member ELIZABETH A. PREAST, Chief Clerk JOHN B. CHILDERS, Chief Counsel to the Minority HAROLD C. ANDERSON, Staff Editor SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL SPENDING PRACTICES AND OPEN GOVERNMENT SAM NUNN, Georgia LAWTON CHILES, Florida, Chairman HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington H. JOHN HEINZ III, Pennsylvania RONALD A. CHIODO, Chief Counsel and Staff Director JANET STUDLEY, Counsel CHRISTINE SHERIDAN BETTS, Chief Clerk (II) David Cohen, president of Common Cause; accompanied by Ms. Anne McBride, associate legislative director, and Robert Rodriguez. Lynne K. Zusman, Chief, Information and Privacy Section, Civil Division, Charles B. Curtis, Chairman, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission_ Daniel O'Neal, Chairman of the Interstate Commerce Commission, accom- Fred G. Favor, executive director, Local and Short Haul Carriers National Conference, accompanied by Everett Hutchinson, attorney - John R. Evans, Commissioner, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Richard K. Berg, executive secretary, Administrative Conference of the United States, accompanied by Stephen Klitzman, staff attorney... Wayne Granquist, Associate Director for Administrative Management, Office of Management and Budget, accompanied by Robert Bedell, Joseph M. Hendrie, Chairman, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, accom- Bmv79 (III) Curtis, Charles B.: Testimony. Alphabetical list of witnessess-Continued Article: "FPC Can't Decide on Route To Bring Gas From Alaska," Page 78 from the Washington Star, May 3, 1977_. 81 Prepared statement with attachments_._ 87 Cymrot, Mark: Testimony. 263 Prepared statement with exhibits__ 269 Evans, John R.: Testimony. Open meeting agenda Prepared statement.. Evans, Mark: Testimony.. Favor, Fred G.: 177 180 187 133 First annual report on compliance with Government in the Sun- 289 Prepared statement.. 334 Letter from Mr. Hendrie to Senator Chiles, August 31, 1978. A guide to meetings of the Board of Governors - Letter to Wayland D. McClellan, General Counsel, U.S. Foreign Statement of Michael Pertschuk, Chairman, Federal Trade Commission__ 392 395 Letter to James L. Kelley, Acting General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regula- 405 OVERSIGHT OF THE GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE ACT-PUBLIC LAW 94-409 TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1977 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL SPENDING PRACTICES, AND OPEN GOVERNMENT, COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room 1114, Dirksen Building, Senator Lawton Chiles (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senator Chiles. Staff members present: Ronald A. Chiodo, chief counsel and staff director; Janet R. Studley, counsel; Robert F. Harris, deputy staff director; and Christine Sheridan Betts, chief clerk. Senator CHILES. Good morning. We will convene our hearings. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CHILES Senator CHILES. When I first came to Washington, 7 years ago, I noticed that all of the doors in town were closed. Whatever of the public's business was being conducted behind those doors was apparently of such import and necessary secrecy that the public could not be trusted to know how its own Government ran. Besides the sensitivity of the matters under discussion, I was told, was the necessity to let Commission and committee members meet in camera so that they could be "very frank" in discussing the matters at hand. Well, I don't buy that. Most people who are reluctant to state their opinions publicly are reluctant because they either are unable to state their position or simply don't understand the matter at hand. While I can sympathize with their desire to be inarticulate in front of as small a group as possible, I don't think fear of embarassment should override the public's right to see their own Government being run, warts and all. Government in the Sunshine works well in Florida. Although a number of Florida newspaper people had to get themselves thrown out of meetings or into jail, they were successful in forcing reluctant bureaucrats to conduct the public's business in public. I was sitting in a closed Senate committee meeting one morning when it struck me that the matter being discussed was the budget for the Botanical Gardens. While the matter was obviously of great importance to the employees there, no one suggested that the national (1) security would be materially weakened if the Chinese found out we were into azaleas this year. In the end, it turned out the meeting was closed because somewhere along the line someone had closed the meeting one day many years ago and no one had ever thought to open the door again. In due course, we opened the doors of the Congress, so that today practically all meetings are entirely open to anyone who chooses to attend. Hopefully, the taxpayers will become slightly more trusting of a Congress which does their business in the open. Certainly, we have not weakened the Republic by discussing the Botanical Garden's budget in public. When I first introduced the "Government in the Sunshine Act," everyone laughed. The next year I had 16 cosponsors. Everyone stopped laughing and got mad. We heard an ocean of testimony which proved beyond any reasonable doubt that if this law were passed economic depression would be unavoidable. Short of suggesting that a plague of locusts would lay waste to the Middle West, the bill's detractors prophesied an unending stream of disaster which would befall us. Well, the bill passed the Senate by 94 to 0. The House vote was 384 to 0. In spite of the chorus' mutterings of doom, the act went into effect on March 11. And, 8 months later, the Republic still stands. Hopefully, we have convinced the doomsayers that the general public can be taken into its Government's confidence. Someday we may even convince the general public to take us into their confidence. What we intend to do today is see how well the Government in the Sunshine Act is faring. We will ask opponents and defenders of the act what their views are now that the act has been in effect for 8 months. We will ask the agencies what their difficulties have been, and chastize them in some instances for particularly flagrant violations of the act. But most of all, we want to begin to change people's minds about the whole idea of Government in the Sunshine. The Congress has overwhelmingly stated that the people of this country have a perfect right to know and observe our Government being run. With a few exceptions-secret material, plans for criminal prosecutions, or material which would constitute an invasion of privacy, there is no commonsense reason why citizens don't have every right to watch how the Government is spending their money. Citizens cannot hold Government officials accountable for their actions if they don't know what those officials are doing. We want to make sure that the public has the opportunity to be informed about and to understand its Government activities. The agencies make decisions which directly affect all Americans. Today we hope to determine how accessible the decisionmaking processes really are. Government employees should not instinctively resist a requirement to make their policy decisions in public. Most agencies are proud of their capacity for rational thought, and of their staff's ability to assemble a comprehensive set of documentation and policy options. I would think they would be proud to have their skill and ability displayed in public. We hope to convince some, if not all, of them that Government in the Sunshine is the most desirable way to go about conducting the public's business. |