Transparency in Government How American Citizens

Influence Public Policy

by Ellen M. Katz
A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but
a prologue to a farce or a tragedy; or, perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern
ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with
the power which knowledge gives.
former U.S. President James Madison, 1822
Begin text
The heart of American democracy and of any democracy is meaningful, active
participation by its people in government decisions that touch their lives.
The soul of such a system is the ability of ordinary citizens to hold government officials
accountable for their actions. Known as transparency, this essential democratic
process takes many forms, but all allow concerned citizens to see openly into the
activities of their government, rather than permitting these processes to be cloaked in
secrecy.
The principles underlying transparency in government activity are embodied in the
fundamental tenets that have guided the United States since its founding, including the
Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. And, over time, a body of law,
regulation, and practice has grown up that makes it easy for ordinary citizens to have
access to some important meetings of government officials, to request and receive
government documents, and to have input into government decisions and rule-making.
To various degrees, the principles of transparency have taken root at the local, state, and
federal level.
In the United States, transparency in judicial proceedings, much of which evolved from
English common law, has generally provided the right to a public trial. Likewise, the U.S.
Congress has over the course of its history opened itself both to influence from many
groups of citizens and organizations, and to comment from knowledgeable experts,
officials, and citizens during hearings on proposed legislation or on important issues.
In addition, transparency can be found at work in the various federal
government.executive branch agencies that report to the president of the United
States. From food, to automobiles, to the environment, everyday lives of citizens are
touched in many ways by decisions issued by these agencies. And, increasingly, there
are numerous ways for individuals to have an impact on policy-making procedures of the
executive branch. Some groups attempt to influence all three branches of the federal
government the judicial, legislative, and executive, simultaneously.
In general, U.S. citizens are free to participate in the political process as much or as
little as they wish. Some people become deeply immersed in causes they believe in,
either as individuals or, frequently, through groups formed to advocate one or more
causes. Others rarely get involved or voice their concerns only when they have individual
concerns.
LETTING THE SUN IN
The most basic way for citizens to hold leaders responsible is by voting in elections and
by serving on juries in open courtroom proceedings. But these are not the only ways. In
the United States and in other democracies, citizens can influence government on a
daily basis, not just on election day. Numerous other opportunities can, and should, exist
to ensure that both elected and non-elected public officials remain accountable to the
people.
In the United States, when executive branch officials get together to conduct
government business, they are often required to announce their meetings in advance
and to hold them in forums that are open to the public. The law underlying this practice,
a federal statute dubbed the Sunshine Act, enacted in 1976, makes for better, more
informed decisions. Whats more, the policies that result are perceived as fairer since
they reflect broad input from many interested parties. There are similar laws throughout
the country at the state level.
In many situations, citizens are allowed to not just attend public meetings, but to
comment during the proceedings. For instance, before the Environmental Protection
Agency made a decision on a proposed regulation concerning pollution in 1999, it held a
series of hearings around the country and listened to hours of testimony. At one session
in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, a citizen named Randy Hester expressed his feelings,
probably shared by many attending the meeting: As an American, I feel its one of my
inalienable rights to have a voice and Im so very glad to have this opportunity today.
A popular way for citizens to express their viewpoints is by writing letters or sending
electronic messages to elected officials. Its not unusual for members of Congress (a
senator or a congressman) to receive thousands of pieces of mail a day about a
compelling issue. People organized to promote a cause initiate many letter-writing
campaigns. These groups can be made up of business, religious, or labor
representatives, or they can be dedicated to issues such as protecting the environment
or human health. They also visit legislators to lobby them personally.
Transparency in American government can also be found in the rules imposed on
people who run for public office. By law, candidates who want to be elected to Congress
or the presidency must file detailed reports disclosing how much money they raise and
spend. Candidates are required to disclose all individuals and groups who give them
contributions of more than $200. There is also a law limiting the amount of money
anyone can give directly to a candidate.
Ideally, the purpose of these regulations is to restrict the influence wealthy people and
powerful groups have over politicians. Similarly, financial statements are required of
federal leaders once they are elected or appointed. On these statements, high officials
must disclose the nature and extent of their financial assets to assure there are no
conflicts of interest with the job.
Financial disclosure statements are made available to the public and the media, which
is shielded from government censorship by the First Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution.
Americans use all of these methods of accountability so they can intelligently exercise
their right to vote. And, over the years, thanks both to new laws and improved access to
information, it has become easier for citizens, in particular, to obtain information from
executive branch agencies and to have influence over those agencies actions that affect
the public.
REQUESTING RECORDS
Through a federal statute enacted in 1966, Americans can ask for copies of records
maintained by various federal government agencies, departments, and the military. Since
it was enacted, the Freedom of Information Act has become an extremely popular
information tool. Historians, journalists, educators, private companies, citizen interest
groups and ordinary people have used this law to examine documents that would
otherwise have been kept secret. Laws that are somewhat similar exist at the state level.
Over the years, this important law has helped citizens make public records about
events that Americans want to know more about, such as the 1963 assassination of
President John F. Kennedy and the tragic 1986 accident involving the Challenger
spaceship.
 Now, the Internet has made reading some of this information even easier.
Many documents are posted electronically by interest groups and the government. For
example, the Federal Bureau of Investigation makes frequently requested records from
its case files available on its Web Site (www.fbi.gov).
The Freedom of Information Act enables Americans to get greater access to
information on the activities and operations of the U.S. government, explains Bernard
Fensterwald III, a private attorney who specializes in the field. It keeps Americans
informed.
There are several exemptions designed to assure that sensitive information doesnt
fall into the wrong hands. For example, any record that could compromise national
security or cause an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy cannot be released. And
documents belonging to the president, vice president, members of Congress, and the
courts arent included in the act, although many of them are routinely released.
But unless a record meets the legal standard to be withheld, it must be disclosed to
the public on request, Fensterwald notes.
Under the Freedom of Information Act, federal agencies may charge filers a
reasonable fee for the cost of searching and copying, although in some cases, the
service is free. Individuals dont have to disclose why they want records, which can
include printed and electronic material, tape recordings, maps, and photographs.
Even government workers can use the law to ensure that their agencies are operating
ethically. For instance, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), an
organization of government workers, frequently asks for records to expose potential
wrongdoing and malpractice involving environmental issues.
Just the fact that these groups are using their rights publicly to obtain records can
make a big difference. Filing a request by itself can be enough to stop something that
was proceeding because it was not known, says Jeff Ruch, executive director of PEER.
Americans also have protection concerning information being held about them in secret
files. Under another law, called the Privacy Act, enacted in 1974, citizens have the right
to see records that the federal government has assembled on them and request that
these be corrected if there are errors.
And under the U.S. Constitution, American citizens can use their right of free speech
to criticize official policy. For example, after obtaining documents about the protection of
wetland areas, PEER wrote a report card giving the government poor grades on this
particular issue and made it public by releasing it to the media and posting it on the
Internet.
When a group of people from within government speak out about improper or illegal
conduct, they are often called whistle-blowers because they bring such behavior to the
attention of the public. These whistle-blowers have specific rights under U.S. law to be
free of reprisals for their actions.
Once retrieved by the public, Freedom of Information Act documents are often widely
shared with other interested citizens. For example, in Pensacola, Florida, a group of
residents obtained federal government records maintained by the Army Corps of
Engineers regarding the environmental impact of a proposed high-rise condominium on
the beach. They then placed 900 pages of information in a community building for other
residents to read. As of this writing, the issue is still pending, but the community is
forcefully representing its interests.
The United States is one of a handful of countries that have a legal right for its citizens
to access such government information. Other countries with similar laws include
Australia, Canada, France, New Zealand, and Sweden.
LEARNING ABOUT DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS
Through the Federal Register, a newspaper published every business day, Americans
can read about rules or regulations that federal agencies are proposing before they are
adopted.
Federal agencies are required to publish notices about certain major policy issues in
the Federal Register, and by law, anyone can comment on proposed policy changes.
Comments are usually made in writing, but there are often opportunities to express an
opinion by e-mail or in person during a public hearing.
Each Federal Register notice gives citizens detailed instructions on how to comment
within the usual time limit of 30 to 90 days. The suggestions or criticism cannot be
ignored. When the final regulations are later published in the Federal Register, agencies
must address the comments received from the public and describe changes made in
response to them.
In addition to commenting on an existing regulation, an individual or organization can
file a petition advocating new policies that federal agencies should follow.
Many concerned individuals and organizations scan the Federal Register each day for
items of interest. Copies can be read in public libraries, colleges and on the Internet
(www.access.gpo.gov).
CASE STUDIES
The Freedom of Information Act and the Federal Register are two important tools that
Americans use, increasingly, to foster transparency in government. The knowledge they
receive from these sources frequently translates into changes in public policy.
Take a look at how citizen groups make a difference in three areas of daily life.

The environment: The mission of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to

protect human health and safeguard air, water, and land from pollution. One of its duties
involves setting standards to limit the amount of pollution coming from the tailpipes of
motor vehicles.
U.S. citizens involved in conservation groups recently scored a victory in changing the
governments plans to reduce air pollution. I think we made a loud public racket and I
think the EPA responded appropriately to that, says Frank ODonnell, executive director
of Clean Air Trust, a coalition of environmental organizations.
The case began in the late 1990s when the EPA began discussing more stringent
rules for the emissions coming from automobile tailpipes.
Thousands of comments were received from auto manufacturers, oil companies,
citizen groups, and individuals.
Several conservation organizations urged officials to close a loophole involving sport
utility vehicles (SUVs), minivans, and light-duty trucks, which emit more pollution than
passenger cars. When emission and gasoline efficiency standards were first enacted in
the 1970s, these vehicles were exempt from the rules imposed on automobiles because
they were generally used only on farms and construction sites. But by 1998, SUVs and
light trucks accounted for about half of all new vehicle sales to the public and were used
for everyday trips to shop and commute to work.
The EPA issued proposed regulations in early 1999 to impose more stringent pollution
standards on all vehicles. Under the new standards, regular passenger cars are set to
come into compliance by 2004. For the first time, the rules also require that SUVs and
light trucks under 8,500 pounds meet the same standards by 2007.
During subsequent public hearings, numerous citizens and organizations used their
rights to argue that even tougher standards would help the battle against air pollution.
They urged the EPA to also include SUVs over 8,500 pounds in the regulations, instead
of allowing them to be exempt. And they wanted to make vehicle manufacturers comply
with the rules sooner than proposed.
Representatives for the auto industry made a very different public case, testifying that
they couldnt possibly make the necessary changes before the proposed deadlines.
In late 1999, both sides scored a partial victory. The EPA announced that the heavier
SUVs would be included in the regulations, but the timetable for making the changes
would remain the same.

Taxes: Like many countries, the United States imposes an income tax on its citizens.
The tax is administered by an agency within the Treasury Department called the Internal
Revenue Service (IRS).
American taxpayers have opportunities to influence the system for collecting revenue
in a variety of ways, beginning with the creation of tax legislation. The actual tax laws are
written by members of Congress and signed by the president after much debate and
testimony from citizens, businesses, and lobbying groups.
The entire set of laws is referred to as the Internal Revenue Code, but it is just one
part of the tax world. The IRS issues regulations that interpret the laws in greater detail.
The entire system is quite complex, with nearly 50,000 pages of laws and IRS
regulations that are available to the public on the IRS web site (www.irs.gov).
As part of its duties, the IRS creates tax forms for citizens to fill out to report their
income. The agency also writes publications provided free to the public explaining the
laws.
Even after tax legislation is passed, U.S. citizens can have an influence on how it is
applied. For example, in 1998, a law was passed providing assistance to divorced and
separated people who are sometimes held responsible for the tax debts of their former
spouses.
As part of its customary practice, the government asked for comments on how to best
implement the law. The National Taxpayers Union, a citizen organization, submitted
suggestions on ways the IRS taxpayer forms and instructions could be made less
complex for these innocent spouses, according to its spokesman Pete Sepp. When the
revised taxpayer IRS forms came out in 1999, they included easy-to-understand sections
answering frequently asked questions on this issue. The IRS also added a new taxpayer
publication to its library called Innocent Spouse Relief.
The National Taxpayers Union was pleased with the changes, Sepp says, although
they didnt include everything the organization asked for. But the entire policy-making
process is a matter of compromise and settling for what is satisfactory rather than
striving for what is perfect, he explains.
Besides, Sepp points out, there will be opportunities in the future to suggest further
revisions to the forms. Change is often made in incremental steps, he adds. In addition
to creating tax forms, the IRS has the job of collecting money from citizens. This means
that each taxpayers return form is studied for accidental or deliberate miscalculations.
The final stage of the process is when the agency examines or audits some taxpayers
because it suspects errors or cheating.
Although the exact formula the IRS uses for deciding which taxpayers are audited is a
secret, citizens have been given some insight into the audit selection process. In fact,
one organization, called the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC),
devotes itself entirely to obtaining data from the IRS and other agencies to ensure the
system remains equitable.
Fairness is an essential component of enforcement because without it, public support
for a program can easily evaporate, forcing the government to spend more and more of
its revenues on coercive efforts to force compliance, explains Sue Long, the co-director
of TRAC, which is associated with Syracuse University in New York.
In one of its efforts, TRAC filed Freedom of Information Act requests and discovered
that taxpayers in some regions of the country are audited more often than those in other
U.S. regions. When the sensitive data was made public, it was discussed extensively in
Congress and the media.
This is a classic example of a group using its legal rights to promote transparency in
government. The variations uncovered in the agencys own data are considerable and
the American public is fully justified in asking why, Ms. Long says. The IRS has an
obligation to provide a no-nonsense answer. Although the final resolution is still pending
the matter has been ventilated in public. Even as organizations like the National
Taxpayers Union and TRAC continue to monitor and influence the IRS, the tax agency
itself began a program recently to receive more citizen input. Around the country, groups
of volunteers called Citizen Advocacy Panels now meet to identify problems and make
recommendations.
The IRS will benefit greatly from a fresh perspective on our service as seen through
our customers eyes, says IRS Commissioner Charles O. Rossotti.

Food and drugs: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates drugs, medical
devices, food, and cosmetics to make sure they are safe and pure. The agency is part of
the Department of Health and Human Services.
Part of the FDAs job is to ensure that consumer products are labeled truthfully. This
mandate resulted in a major regulatory change recently that affects nearly all Americans.
The FDA took action after it received numerous complaints about the labels on non-
prescription or over-the-counter drugs, such as aspirin and cough syrup that are
dispensed in stores without a doctors prescription. Consumers found the wording on the
packages of some of these medicines difficult to understand. Elderly people had an
especially hard time reading the tiny, compressed type.
Consequently, the FDA issued new mandatory regulations for drug makers. The rules,
which gradually phase in until 2005, were written after more than 2,000 comments from
citizen groups and industry representatives were analyzed by the FDA. They require
instructions on medicine to be in large type and obligate drug companies to include clear
warnings about possible dangers on the bottle.
Warnings on a label can even wind up on something as simple as snack foods as a
result of public pressure on the FDA. In another case where transparency in rulemaking
made a difference, citizens were able to persuade the government to place a notice on
the packages of certain potato chips and other snack foods containing a fat substitute
called Olestra. After 10 years of deliberations, the FDA had approved Olestra for use in
1996 after determining it was safe. Many consumers wanted to buy products with the
fake fat because they were low in calories. But some health advocacy groups and
medical representatives testified in public hearings that the substance should be banned
because it might cause gastrointestinal problems.
As part of the approval, the FDA required manufacturers to include a warning on the
back of all snack packages containing Olestra. Consumers are cautioned that the
product may cause abdominal cramping and other side effects.
The FDA regulations involving Olestra and the other case studies cited here illustrate
how the American system of public policy works. Citizens have the right to know about
the activities of their government and they can use the information to influence decisions
that affect their lives, both in small and large ways. People in the United States know that
transparency in government, as practiced in the real world, has its flaws, including the
fact that permitting ordinary citizens to influence the government regulatory process can
be slow and even expensive. But, as Thomas Jefferson, the primary author of the U.S.
Constitution, put it in 1791: I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending
too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. Most Americans, like
Jefferson, believe that allowing the sun to shine on government activities is worth these
drawbacks. In return, U.S. citizens receive the benefits of a transparent, participatory
democracy.
HOW U.S. FEDERAL AGENCIES TOUCH LIVES
Within the federal government, there are 14 executive departments, which are further
divided into agencies with specific duties. There are also more than 100 other
independent federal agencies regulating many aspects of life.
Each is diverse in size and mission, and in some cases, their responsibilities
overlap.
Here are brief descriptions of some major federal agencies, all of whose
rulemaking proceedings are open to public comment:
Consumer Product Safety Commission helps protect the public from injury caused
by consumer products.
Federal Communications Commission regulates television, radio, wire, satellite,
and cable communications.
Federal Emergency Management Agency provides assistance to citizens and local
government agencies to help reduce loss of life and property during disasters such as
hurricanes, earthquakes, and fires.
Federal Trade Commission promotes free and fair trade competition in the
American economy.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration sets and enforces safety standards
for automobiles to help prevent injuries and death in crashes.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration protects the health of American
workers on the job by setting standards for employers to follow.
Securities and Exchange Commission responsible for protecting the public against
malpractice in the stock market and other financial markets.
Small Business Administration lends money to business owners and provides
financial assistance following natural disasters, including hurricanes and floods.
Provides support to businesses operated by women and minorities.