You gotta love government
bureaucrats. Who else could figure out
how to keep you in the dark while denying they’re doing so?
If
the government had had its way, chances are you would never have known about
the wave of illegal immigrants that began flooding across our borders this
summer. The Border Patrol made no announcement. Neither did its umbrella agency, the
Department of Homeland Security. They
simply began dropping off single immigrant mothers with children at bus stops—including
Tucson’s Greyhound station. They didn’t
bother to notify local agencies, much less alert the media or the public at
large. We only found out because alert
reporters glommed onto the fact that agents were dumping off the immigrants without
food or water.
Now,
several months down the road, questions remain.
How many immigrants, precisely, did the government put on buses? According to media reports, some actually received
plane rides to the bus stations. How
many jetliner tickets are we talking about?
How much did Uncle Sam spend on all this? The illegal immigrants got a free pass to go
wherever they wanted, under the promise that they would report to immigration
authorities once they arrived at their final destinations. How many did so? These questions remain because CPB and DHS
have kept that information from you.
In
August I tried to get answers by phone. That’s
when I learned that yes, DHS has a press office, but no, members of the press
can’t have the number. Instead, media
must submit inquiries by email and then hope for a call back. The obvious beauty of this is that emails are
so much easier to blow off than a live phone call (can you say, “da-LEET”?) And that’s exactly what happened to me. My attempts to get information this way resulted
in an hilarious conversation with a flunky in a lower office who suggested that
perhaps my email inquiry might stand a better chance of getting a response if I
were to put key passages in bold text, which I then proceeded to do. (I wrote about this over the summer—to refresh
yourself on that high hilarity and mirth, follow this link.)
When
those efforts scored a giant goose egg, I filed formal requests for answers
under the Federal Freedom of Information Act. I filed knowing full well that the attempt was
doomed to failure. Obviously, if the
government wanted this information out, it’d be out, right? But I went through the process anyway knowing
it would give me something to write about on this blog and bloviate about on
the radio. And so I was neither
surprised nor disappointed when I received the email that popped into my
mailbox this morning informing me that my request had received “final
disposition”—without telling me what that disposition was. (No, I’m not making this up or exaggerating
in any way. Read on.)
The
details of the filing process and the responses I got along the way provide stunning
insight into the mind of the bureaucrat—in other words, more moments of wry amusement. And as I relate them in chronological order, remember
that these are your tax dollars at
work (assuming, that is, you are among the minority of Americans who now pay
those).
On
August 8, I filed three FOIA requests. I
submitted two of them online via the Customs and Border Protection portal set
up for that purpose. The first request
sought information from the people keeping records about border encounters. The second sought the same information from
the keepers of immigrant travel records.
I filed them that way because the form indicated that these were
separate departments. I also mailed a
third request, similar to the first two, in writing to the U.S. Customs and
Immigration Service (the text of the requests is pasted below). Both of the electronic requests received
acknowledgements and were assigned tracking numbers. The written request received no
acknowledgement of any kind.
Six
weeks later, on September 12, I received a notice via email that one of the two
requests (CBP-2014-039629, to be precise) was being closed due to the fact that
it was a duplicate. Actually, CBP-2014-039629
was the original; the request that was left open (CBP-2014-039630) was the
duplicate and I had so marked it, but never mind.
On
that same date, I received notice that the surviving electronic request was
having its tracking number changed—from CBP-2014-039630 to CBP-OBP-2014-039630. Okay, fine.
The explanation for the change? The
email said: “This is normally due to the
request being transferred to another agency (for example, EPA to Dept. of
Commerce) or to a sub-agency to process it.”
You
may be curious, as I was, what OBP in the new tracking number stands for. It stands for “Office of the Border Patrol.” Presumably, the handlers who’d canceled my
request for information related to border encounters on the grounds that it was
a duplicate were now routing my request to the people who actually had information
about border encounters, as I had originally requested. (Recall what I said about your tax dollars at
work.)
The
very next day, I received a notice that the handlers were changing the tracking
number yet again, from CBP-OBP-2014-039630 to CBP-2014-039630. If you look closely (all the digits initially
made my eyes cross) you’ll see that the bureaucrats had changed the tracking
number back to what it had been in the
first place. The explanation? “This is normally due to the request being
transferred to another agency (for example, EPA to Dept. of Commerce) or to a
sub-agency to process it.” Likely
interpretation: The Office of the Border
Patrol had bounced my request right back to Customs and Border Protection and
had told them to deal with it and quit trying to shove hot potatoes onto
someone else’s desk.
This
morning (September 16 as I type this) I received an email with the subject line,
“Final Disposition, Request CBP-2014-039630.”
In the body of the email was no message of any kind. Nor was there an attachment. So, I replied and pointed this out.
That
resulted in this emailed response: “Thank
you for contacting the CBP FOIA Division. This email address is no longer
accepting email correspondence. To
submit a FOIA request online, check status of an exisitng [sic] FOIA request,
or to download responsve [sic] records from the CBP FOIA Reading Room, please
visit the CBP FOIA Internet Web at www.cbp.gov/foia.”
I
particularly enjoyed that. It gave me
the bureaucratic heave-ho I had fully anticipated while also serving as an
unexpected and delightful indictment of the American system of education. Very cool.
So,
I went back to the portal I’d used to file the requests in the first place and signed
in. I did not at first see anything on
the screen for either file other than labels saying “Closed.” But after digging through to a second screen,
scrolling to the bottom, and putting on my higher-powered reading glasses, I
found a single document listed under a heading that read “released records.” The “released record” turned out to be a letter stating why there would be no released records. The full text
of it is pasted below. But the gist of
it is that no records would be provided to me because my request had been “too
broad.”
What
would make it less broad? The letter was
very helpful in that regard. For each
document requested, I should provide, it read, “the date, title or name,
author, recipient, and subject matter of the record.”
It’s
a stroke of pure genius. To get the
document, all you have to do is have the document in your hands so you can read
off the information needed to obtain the document. I was breathless with awe and admiration. Judges’
score in the Olympic Bureaucratic Stiff-Arm Event: a unanimous 10 out of 10.
But
never let it be said the author (who did not indicate nor sign his/her name)
was not trying to be helpful. “See Title
6 C.F.R §5.21(b),” the letter went on to say.
Bureaucrats. What are you gonna
do?
My
favorite part of the letter, though, was this statement, written and presented
(I presume) with a straight face: “This
is not a denial of your request.” The
letter went on to say that should I provide a “perfected request,” I would then
“be advised as to the status of your request.”
More
genius. My efforts were fruitless, but
emotionally I’m not even allowed to feel rejected at this point. I haven’t been denied. See?
The system works. “We’re your
government, and we’re here to help.”
As
it turns out, there’s an appeals process for rejected requests. Since the government assures me mine was not rejected, I’m not sure the process
applies in my case, and it probably doesn’t.
But, unbridled optimist that I am, and since the appeals button was not
disabled, I availed myself of the filing procedure anyway. I wrote a few paragraphs outlining and
summarizing the points above, and in closing, added this:
“In
support of this request, I direct your attention to president Obama's
memorandum on ‘Transparency and Open Government,’ now posted on whitehouse.gov,
the first paragraph of which reads: ‘My
Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in
Government. We will work together to
ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public
participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and
promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.’ In good faith, I am seeking on behalf of
PowerTalk 1210 and our Tucson radio listeners the transparency and
collaboration the President promised.”
What
do you think? While waiting for a
response, should I hold my breath? No?
The
letter also invited me to contact the FOIA office by phone. Wow. An
actual phone number. That did impress
me. So I dialed it. Care to guess what happened? What do you think happened? I got voice
mail. Dutifully, I left a detailed message. Two, in fact, following both branches of the
voice mail tree that were offered. Care
to lay odds on my chances of getting a response? Hint:
I’m still waiting for a response to the last voice mail message I left with DHS six weeks ago.
It’s
funny, but really, it’s not. It doesn’t
matter where you stand on immigration—legal or otherwise. In our country, the people are supposed to be
sovereign. Government is administered
for the benefit of the governed, not for the benefit of the bureaucrats or the
politicians. If the information I’m
seeking reflects well on the administration, it’s hard to imagine it would be
withheld. I’m much more inclined to
believe the data do not put the administration in a good light, and that it’s
withholding the numbers for the same reason the President has delayed
announcing his latest executive orders to protect more illegal immigrants and reduce
deportations: he and his party fear the
news will adversely affect the fortunes of Democrats in the November mid-term
elections.
Maybe
I’m wrong to be suspicious of the Obama administration’s motives. Maybe this information is secret not as the
result of any notion that the public can’t handle the truth or can’t be trusted
with it, but merely because of bureaucratic indifference and incompetence. There has been no shortage of either in this administration.
But
I don’t care the reason. You and I
deserve these answers. This administration’s
actions to keep us in the dark—regardless of motives—do not serve
democracy. This is not the way
government in our country is supposed to work, and it’s contrary to the spirit
of open government this President promised us.
In writing.
Supporting
documents are below. Enjoy. (I know I did).
August 4, 2014: The body of my initial FOIA requests (the text was similar for each
of the three requests):
I
am a member of the news media and am inquiring into the handling of undocumented
migrants amid the current immigration crisis.
Specifically, on behalf of the PowerTalk 1210 on-air team, I am looking
for documents shedding a light on the handling of undocumented unaccompanied
minors and also undocumented women with children from May 2014 through the
present date (August 4). I regret that I
do not have information on what documents might be in existence. I am seeking:
Any
and all intra-agency emails on the subject of how to handle the aforementioned
migrants, particularly as it pertains to detentions, the terms under which some
migrants have been released, any discussions of policy relevant to these
matters.
- Any and all correspondence between USCIS employees and administrators and elected or appointed officials regarding these matters.
- Any and all receipts or other documents related to expenditures for the transportation and care of such migrants.
- Any and all emails, letters or other documents related to undocumented migrants checking in with immigration authorities at their final destination, as they have been ordered to do. (Note: we are particularly interested in knowing how many immigrants have checked in as ordered).
- Any and all documents containing statistics related to how many unaccompanied children are being released and the categories of people to whom they are being released (relatives, non-related sponsors, etc).
- Any and all documents reflecting costs to USCIS for the transportation and detention of undocumented foreign nationals in this period.
- Any and all documents reflecting the amount of donated goods and services provided to USCIS by private citizens and local communities in response to the influx of migrants.
I
am not seeking the private records of any individual immigrants or immigrant
applicants.
Electronic
format is greatly preferred for the documents requested.
My
signature indicates my consent to pay for costs incurred in search and
duplication up to $50.
Thanks
in advance for your attention to this matter.
Forrest
Carr
PowerTalk
1210
September 16, 2014: Rejection letter (on U.S. Customs and Border
Protection Letterhead)
Dear
Mr. Carr:
This
is in reply to your request to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
Upon
review of your FOIA request, it has been determined that your description is too
broad.
You
have requested documents regarding the handling of undocumented, unaccompanied
minors and undocumented women with children from May 1, 2014 through August 4,
2014.
Please
be advised Department of Homeland Security (DHS) regulations require you to
describe the records that you seek in enough detail to enable Departmental
personnel to locate them with a reasonable amount of effort. Whenever possible, your request should
include specific information about each record sought, such as the date, title
or name, author, recipient, and subject matter of the record. See Title 6 C.F.R §5.21(b).
This
is not a denial of your request. Upon
receipt of a perfected request, you will be advised as to the status of your
request.
Your
request has been assigned reference number CBP-2014-039630. Please refer to this identifier in any future
correspondence. You may contact this
office at (202) 325-0150.
FOIA
Division
[no
signature was provided, nor was the name of the writer]
September 16, 2014: Text of my appeal of the rejection
Hi
--as I indicated in my FOAI request, I am interested in learning certain
information about the recent wave of illegal immigration that has, to date,
been withheld from the public. I
initially tried to get this information by phone from the Homeland Security
Press office. When calls were not
returned, I filed FOIA requests. Now
those requests have been turned down on the grounds that they are too
broad. The rejection letter states that
I must provide specific information about the documents requested including
author, date, title, etc. If I had this
information in my hands I would have the documents themselves in my hands and
would not need to file a request to get them.
The
information I'm looking for is pretty simple.
Boiled down to its simplest components, I'm looking to find out how many
illegal immigrant mothers with children DHS put on buses this summer, how much
money it spent in dealing with the wave of illegal immigration by single
mothers with children, and what percentage of those illegal immigrants reported
to immigration authorities at their final destinations as they'd been ordered
to do.
Reporter
questions along these lines in press conferences haven't worked. As noted, my
phone calls haven't worked. And now my
FOAI request hasn't worked. Can you
please advise what steps WILL work--and if none will, explain why this
information is being kept secret?
If
you cannot answer those questions in your capacity as an FOIA officer, I would
appreciate you arranging for me to come into contact with someone in your
agency who can.
In
support of this request, I direct your attention to president Obama's
memorandum on "Transparency and Open Government," now posted on
whitehouse.gov, the first paragraph of which reads:
"My
Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in
Government. We will work together to
ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public
participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and
promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government."
In
good faith, I am seeking on behalf of PowerTalk 1210 and our Tucson radio
listeners the transparency and collaboration the President promised.
###
©2014 by Forrest Carr. All rights reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment