The next front in the FOIA War: Congress blocking disclosure of its dealings with the Executive Branch

By Ryan Mulvey, Opinion Contributor

Presidential interference with public access to politically sensitive agency records has been an ongoing fight that seems unlikely to end anytime soon, and now it appears Congress has decided to get into the game.  My organization, Cause of Action Institute (“CoA Institute”), has long been at the forefront of fighting against unlawful obstruction of the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”).  Last year, we filed a lawsuit against the Office of the White House Counsel to end the practice of “White House equities” review, which results in the delay of responses to FOIA requests that the administration deems politically embarrassing.  With that lawsuit still ongoing, Congress has taken a page from the White House’s playbook to keep records of its dealings with agencies hidden from public view, too.

BuzzFeed reported last week that Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) sent a letter to the Treasury Department that directed the agency to treat all records exchanged with the committee as “congressional records” not subject to the FOIA.  Read More

CoA Institute Sues Treasury for “Sensitive” Records Concealed from Public Disclosure

Washington D.C. – Cause of Action Institute (CoA Institute) today filed a lawsuit to compel production of records from the U.S. Department of Treasury dealing with the agency’s “sensitive review” policy. These policies often delay open records requests through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), particularly when such productions contain politically sensitive or potentially embarrassing information, directly contrary to congressional policy.

To better understand the Treasury Department’s sensitive review procedures, who is involved, and how it is used, CoA Institute submitted a FOIA request to the agency in June 2013 seeking records relating to its FOIA process.

CoA Institute Vice President John Vecchione: “It’s ironic that our FOIA to learn more about sensitive review has itself been held up because of sensitive review. Even after the Department of Treasury agreed through mediation last year to start producing responsive records, it has failed to produce a single document. Agencies have utilized opaque sensitive review processes to delay records requests, adding months and even years to an agency’s response time. The public has a right to information about how agencies obstruct and delay open records requests that may reveal politically embarrassing information.”

According to information obtained from various agency inspectors general, similar sensitive review policies have been used at the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Interior, Department of Commerce, Department of Agriculture, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Department of Veterans Affairs. At some agencies, sensitive review is applied not only to information the agency’s management considers sensitive, but also to any FOIA request from a representative of the news media, like CoA Institute, or where the request is likely to attract media or political attention.

Sensitive review often is conducted by political appointees—and sometimes by the Office of the White House Counsel—rather than by career FOIA professionals. These appointees sometimes required staff to find and provide information about requesters that FOIA does not require requestors to provide, such as where the requestors live, who they work for, and whether their employer is politically active or part of the news media.

The full complaint can be accessed HERE
All exhibits can be accessed HERE

 

 

Why Did U.S. Choose to Send $1.7 Billion in Untraceable Cash to Iran?

Washington, DC – Today, Cause of Action Institute (CoA Institute) sent a second Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the U.S. Department of Treasury to obtain records that will shed light on the Obama administration’s decision to ship more than $1.7 billion in untraceable cash to Iran. In light of recent testimony before Congress, as well as reports of concerns expressed by the Department of Justice, questions remain surrounding the decision to send cash rather than make the payments using more transparent means.

CoA Institute President and CEO, and former federal judge, Alfred J. Lechner, Jr.: “Regardless of the merits of the settlement agreement, and regardless of whether the cash payments created ‘leverage’ for the release of American hostages, shipping more than $1.7 billion in untraceable cash to the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism appears to be unjustifiable – particularly when alternative, more transparent means were available.”

Between January 14 and February 5, 2016, the U.S. Department of the Treasury transferred approximately $1.7 billion to Iran. The payments allegedly settled a long-standing claim before the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal, but Obama administration officials have also conceded that the payments served as “leverage” to ensure the release of several Americans held hostage by Iran. The Treasury Department wired each of the payments to a European bank, where it was then converted into foreign currency and the cash disbursed to an Iranian official.

Last month, President Obama said that “we had to give [the Iranians] cash . . . because we’re so strict in maintaining sanctions.” This month, the Treasury Department provided testimony to Congress directly contradicting the president’s statement and asserting that in fact the U.S. government has broad leeway to engage in transactions necessary to settle claims before the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal.  In fact, the Department of Treasury recently confirmed to Politico that two wire transfers occurred from the U.S. to Iran around the same time period.

This discrepancy raises questions about the nature of the payments and why – if they were made pursuant to a settlement agreement and therefore could have been wired – the Obama administration agreed to pay the Iranians in untraceable cash.

The FOIA requests all relevant Treasury authorization records for these payments as well as certain communications between the Treasury Department and the State Department concerning the settlement.

The full FOIA request can be found here.

CoA Institute Investigates $400 Million Cash Payment to Iran, Hidden “Side Agreement” During Nuclear Negotiations

Washington, DC – Today, Cause of Action Institute (CoA Institute) sent Freedom of Information Act requests to the U.S. Department of State and U.S. Department of Treasury seeking information surrounding the widely reported $400 million cash payment the Obama administration sent to Iran in January.  Recent revelations about this previously undisclosed cash payment has called into question whether the State Department and other executive branch agencies engage in secret, potentially unlawful negotiations with foreign governments, designed to evade Congressional and public notice and oversight.

Cause of Action President and CEO, and former federal judge, Alfred J. Lechner, Jr.: “Since 1984, Iran has been listed as a state sponsor of terror; it has been subject to various financial sanctions.  Serious concerns about money laundering and terrorist financing in Iran persist. Details regarding this payment and the supposedly coincidental timing of the hostage release have been hidden from the public and Congress.”

Administration officials, including State spokesmen John Kirby, denied any connection between this payment and the release of American hostages, asserting that the payment was part of a separate settlement agreement, despite reports that the Iranians considered the cash payments “ransom.”

Because any transaction with Iran in U.S. dollars violates U.S. sanctions provisions, the $400 million payment was reportedly made entirely with foreign currency and flown into Iran on wooden pallets onboard an unmarked cargo plane. It has also come to light that Department of Justice officials apparently objected to the payment on legal and policy grounds, but were overruled by the State Department.

In a related but separate matter, CoA Institute is also investigating allegations of a secret “side agreement” the State Department apparently negotiated with Iran last year that would ease restrictions on its nuclear program. In July 2015, the United States, along with six other countries, finalized a controversial agreement involving Iran’s nuclear program.  Under the agreement, Iran was supposedly barred for a 15-year period from engaging in nuclear research and development. Despite widespread criticism from Congress, the agreement went into effect beginning in October 2015.

However, within the last few weeks, contents of a secretive “side agreement” have been revealed.  According to the Associated Press, this side agreement allows Iran to start replacing its stockpile of uranium centrifuges with thousands of more sophisticated models beginning in 2027 instead of 2031.  Such a process could cut the time needed to develop weapons-grade uranium to six months or less. If confirmed, this side agreement would significantly reduce the timeframe for Iran to re-build its nuclear capabilities. Despite such serious consequences, this agreement was hidden from the public and from members of Congress.

In order to further examine these issues, CoA Institute today requested records and internal agency communications surrounding these issues.

The letter to the Department of Treasury can be found here.
The letter to the Department of State can be found here.

Cause of Action Forces U.S. Treasury to Stop Snooping on Americans

Treasury Department concedes to Cause of Action’s request to stop collecting online users’ location data

WASHINGTON – Cause of Action, a nonpartisan government accountability organization, last Thursday submitted a letter to the Treasury Department requesting it cease the unauthorized collection of users’ location data online and investigate the program. By Monday morning, the Treasury website in question no longer prompted users to allow it access to their location, marking rapid progress towards government reform, while supporting our claim the practice was indeed unauthorized.

While performing its oversight work recently, Cause of Action utilized a Bureau of the Fiscal Service (“BFS”) website under the control of the United States Department of the Treasury to conduct research. We were surprised to find that when we attempted to access the Treasury Financial Manual located at tfm.fiscal.treasury.gov, the website prompted us to allow it access to the our current location.  We were presented with a message stating the website “wants to track [the user’s] physical location,” and required us to choose to allow the Treasury Department to access our location or to not allow.

“When a government agency uses taxpayer dollars to collect private information about the people they serve, and does so without any apparent authority, we must take every action available to reign in this abuse of executive power,” Cause of Action Executive Director Dan Epstein said. “While we commend the agency for quietly stopping this practice, our work continues to find out all the details about the agency’s unwarranted data collection.”

Cause of Action believes that the location access request by Bureau of the Fiscal Service constituted an unwarranted invasion of privacy, could discourage individuals from accessing government information, and was unlawful under applicable statutes, regulations, guidance, and policy. We are concerned that BFS was collecting data on the location of website users without any proper authority.

Read More Here

CLICK HERE TO READ OUR FOIA REQUEST

CLICK HERE TO READ OUR REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION

The Government is STILL Watching You

Cause of Action demands the Treasury Department stop collecting user location data online

WASHINGTON – Cause of Action, a nonpartisan government accountability organization, has submitted a letter to the Treasury Department requesting it cease the unauthorized collection of users’ location data online and investigate the program. Additionally, CoA has requested all relevant information on this data collection through a Freedom of Information Act.

While performing its oversight work recently, Cause of Action utilized a Bureau of the Fiscal Service (“BFS”) website under the control of the United States Department of the Treasury to conduct research.

We were surprised to find that when we attempted to access the Treasury Financial Manual located at tfm.fiscal.treasury.gov, the website prompted us to allow it access to the our current location.  We were presented with a message stating the website “wants to track [the user’s] physical location,” and required us to choose to allow the Treasury Department to access our location or to not allow.

“In light of an unprecedented data breach at the Office of Personnel Management that affected as many as 18 million people, and the subsequent White House cover-up, it goes without saying this new discovery of more government data collection is incredibly troubling,” Cause of Action Executive Director Dan Epstein said. “We have dedicated ourselves to finding out what is going on behind the government curtain and continue to be amazed at the woefully failed White House pledge to run the ‘most transparent’ administration in U.S. history.”

Cause of Action believes that the location access request by Bureau of the Fiscal Service constitutes an unwarranted invasion of privacy, could discourage individuals from accessing government information, and is unlawful under applicable statutes, regulations, guidance, and policy. We are concerned that BFS is collecting data on the location of website users without any proper authority.

Cause of Action has requested that the Treasury Department cease the unauthorized collection of information at tfm.fiscal.treasury.gov, review the propriety of this collection of information, and submit this matter to the Office of the Inspector General for investigation.

CLICK HERE TO READ OUR FOIA REQUEST

CLICK HERE TO READ OUR REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION

Wall Street Journal: The Wine-Dark Sea of Regulation

By: Jim Dyke Jr.

On May 27, our Napa Valley winery will pull eight cases of Cabernet Sauvignon out of Charleston Harbor in South Carolina. We placed them there six months ago, protected from the elements, following similar experiments in the past two years. The cold water and the tides seem to expedite the aging process, and we believe that our ocean-aged fine wine—which we’ve trademarked as Aquaoir—could revolutionize how vintners around the world think about winemaking. The only obstacle: the federal government.

For more than a year, our winery has been targeted by the Treasury Department, specifically, the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau. The agency believes our product is unfit for human consumption, despite an utter lack of evidence, and it has threatened to revoke our winemaking license. Washington doesn’t recognize this wine for what it is: the product of entrepreneurship and experimentation.

As a small business in a highly competitive industry, we out of necessity want to stand out through innovation. The aging process was the logical place to start. The traditional technique, developed in France hundreds of years ago and hardly changed, is to age wine at a cool 55 degrees Fahrenheit, often for years or decades. Such factors as light and pressure are also important.

Aware of the renown that has historically been attached to wine pulled up from shipwrecks after years on the ocean floor, we decided to see if intentionally submerging wine bottles for months at a time could speed the aging process and enhance flavor along the way. Our search for an ideal location eventually took us to Charleston Harbor. Sixty feet under the waves, there exists a promising blend of temperature, pressure and darkness, with the additional variable of constant motion.

In February 2013, we submerged four steel mesh cages, each containing a case with 12 bottles of our winery’s 2009 Cabernet Sauvignon. To protect the wine, the top of each bottle was coated with high-grade wax sealant. The bottles were left underwater for three months.

After retrieving the wine, we blind-tasted it with a sommelier, comparing it with the original land-aged vintage. It became immediately clear that the ocean had somehow sped the aging process. Intrigued, we took the wine to several experts and chemists, who confirmed that the experiment had created a vintage that, for its age, had uncharacteristically round tannins—the sign of a mature wine.

We promptly took the new product on a road trip, hosting tastings with sommeliers and food-and-beverage experts in Washington, D.C., New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco. The experimentation also continued, with eight cases sitting in Charleston Harbor for six months rather than three.

The tour prompted a certain amount of publicity last year. That’s when we heard from the feds. In March 2014 the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau sent us an email saying that it had identified several potential safety concerns regarding the ocean-aged wine. The letter was informal and contained no indication that we should cease and desist. We retrieved the eight cases, conducted additional tests and dropped a third batch into Charleston Harbor in November.

Then the federal government tried to end our experiment…

Read the full story: Wall Street Journal