NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 12, #19; 20 APRIL 2006)
2. GROUNDSWELL BUILDS IN OPPOSITION TO SMITHSONIAN "SHOWTIME" DEAL
3. OPM ANNOUNCES CHANGES TO ARCHIVAL OCCUPATION SERIES STANDARDS
4. FBI SEEKS TO REVIEW AND CULL JACK ANDERSON PAPERS
5. HISTORIANS SWEEP THIS YEAR'S PULITZER PRIZES
6. BITS AND BYTES: ICS "War Powers” Summer Seminar Announce”; State Releases Vietnam FRUS Volume; NEH Announces "We the People Bookshelf" Awards
7. ARTICLES OF INTEREST: "Washington's Museums: Worth the Price of Admission?
1. WEINSTEIN PLEDGES NO MORE "SECRET" AGREEMENTS
After learning of the existence of yet another secret agreement just this last week -- this one between NARA and the CIA -- Archivist of the United States Allen Weinstein has released a redacted version of that agreement and has pledged that the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) would no longer enter into secret agreements with government agencies that would allow them to withdraw documents from the archives for national-security reasons. The NARA/CIA agreement that was discovered as a result of the ongoing audit of the reclassification program. According to NARA insiders, the October 2001 CIA agreement that was entered into shortly after the 9/11 tragedy appears "to be the model" from which other agreements such as the March 2002 agreement between NARA and the Air Force that was released last week (see "NARA Releases Redacted Version of "Classified or Sensitive" Records Memo" in NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE Vol 12, # 18; 14 April 2006).
Weinstein stated, "There can never be a classified aspect to our mission. Classified agreements are the antithesis of our reason for being. If records must be removed for reasons of national security, the American people will always, at the very least, know when it occurs and how many records are affected." Furthermore, stated the Archivist, "Our focus is on the preservation of records and ensuring their availability to the American public while at the same time fulfilling the peoples expectation that we will properly safeguard the classified records entrusted to out custody. Agencies have the prerogative to classify their requests to the National Archives if disclosure of the reasons why they are asking us to take action would cause identifiable damage to national security. However, what we do in response to such requests, and how we do it, will always be as transparent as possible."
Thomas Blanton, director of the National Security Archives who last week criticized the agreement entered into by Weinstein' predecessor, John Carlin, praised Weinstein. "He's doing the right thing, no more secret agreements to classify open files" said Blanton. Steven Aftergood, director of the anti-secrecy project at the Federation of American Scientists, recently characterized the episode as "a genuine scandal for the archives" also praised Weinstein: "He did not attempt to deny the existence of the problem, and he did not attempt to evade responsibility for it...instead he moved to fix it, and that is something we don't see very often these days." In a letter to Weinstein, the Society for American Archivists (SAA) also thanked the Archivist for "taking the several actions you have taken to balance the public's need to know against national security interests."
John W. Carlin, Weinstein's predecessor who ran the archives from 1995 to 2005 also has issued a statement fully supporting Weinstein's "quick response." In that statement Carlin denies knowledge of the reclassification program and asserts that he was "shocked" to learn of them when he read about the program in a February New York Times article. NARA insiders report that Carlin was briefed but has apparently forgotten about it. According to these sources, Carlin authorized the agreements but he did not personally read them.
Weinstein stated that the existing secret MOU's will soon be replaced with thoroughly transparent versions that will be promulgated as a change to "Classified national Security Information Directive No #1 (32 CFR Part 2001) following formal interagency coordination and an opportunity for public comment. But for the time being, a moratorium on the withdrawal of documents remains in place and an audit of the program is being conducted by the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO). The audit is expected to be completed and a report released 26 April 2006.
For the link to the NARA press release and statement of Archivist Weinstein, go to: http://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2006/nr06-92.html . For additional background on the MOU's, go to: http://www.archives.gov/declassification/background.html .
2. GROUNDSWELL BUILDS IN OPPOSITION TO SMITHSONIAN "SHOWTIME" DEAL More than 200 filmmakers, historians, archivists and others have signed a letter calling upon the Smithsonian Institution to reveal details of its deal with the Showtime Network and reverse the policy that limits access to the Smithsonian's archives, collections, scientists, and curators for anyone who wishes "more than incidental" use of SI resources.
The letter was released during a packed press event where filmmaker Ken Burns passionately described his affection for the Smithsonian but then rebuked its leadership for developing the new rules for filmmakers and researchers. "We want them to stop the current arrangement, share it with the public and hold hearings" said Burns. Restricted access to the archives, he added, "will be a great inconvenience in the future for all filmmakers."
The letter takes strong exception to the secrecy surrounding the contract details. It states that the deal is troubling to independent filmmakers, video bloggers, historians, and educators who make nonincidental use of the Smithsonian's collections and staff in putting their work on the Internet on a noncommmercial basis. The agreement is "an anticompetitive practice that is extremely troubling...Closing off one of the most important collections of source materials and limiting access to staff will have a chilling effect on creativity, will create disincentives for digitization of the collections for access by all Americans, and violates the mission and purposes of the Smithsonian Institution."
The letter, signed by luminaries including filmmakers Michael Moore, law professor Lawrence Lessig, senior PBS official Jacoba Atlas, Organization of American Historians Executive Director Lee Formwalt and a host of well known historians, is posted at the website of the Center for American Progress <http://www.americanprogress.org/smithsonian> and was sent to Smithsonian Secretary Lawrence Small with copies to 23 members of the House and 28 Members of the Senate who have jurisdiction over the Smithsonian and its appropriations.
In addition, the American Historical Association (AHA) issued its own letter raising concerns about the agreement, (for the AHA letter and related postings, go to: www.historians.org). The AHA letter, signed by President Linda Kerber, expresses "alarm and deep dismay" about the agreement between the Smithsonian and Showtime because it "clearly curtails and constrains the options of historians and documentary researchers seeking to use the collections of the Smithsonian, obtain assistance from the staff, and publish their work when and as they choose." Kerber’s letter references the Association’s "Statement on Standards for Professional Conduct" and asserts that the newly entered contract with the Smithsonian is at odds with it. Furthermore, the agreement violates "the trust of generations of Americans who have donated materials to which they believed the public would have free, open, equal and nondiscriminatory access forever."
Like the letter signed by Burns and others, the AHA letter calls for full disclosure of the terms of the contract, revealing the details of the criteria being used to restrict access, and calls for a suspension of the terms of the arrangement "until these issues have been publicly discussed with all of the stakeholders."
On a related note, the Smithsonian's Office of the Inspector General (IG) is looking into the executive compensation and accounting practices of the Smithsonian Business Ventures (SBV) -- the 430 full-time employee division which has jurisdiction over all the institution's retail and publishing operations, including deals such as the Showtime agreement. One of the issues being investigated focuses on the SBV pay scale that enables its top executives to draw salaries comparable to similar private sector positions. For example, Secretary Small earns $813,000 while Gary M Beer, the CEO of the SBV earns $525,000, many times more than the top pay scale for federal employees that is set at $162,000. Critics complain that based on their performance to date the salaries of SBV officials are excessive and that they may not be in line with guidelines established by the Board of Regents. The IG is also investigating alleged accounting irregularities.
3. OPM ANNOUNCES CHANGES TO ARCHIVAL OCCUPATION SERIES STANDARDS On 31 March 2006, the United States Office of Personnel Management (OPM) announced a change in the Federal educational requirement for archivist positions in the 1420 occupational series. The change will: 1) expand the type of history coursework that can be credited towards qualification as an Archivist; and 2) add to the list of qualifying coursework classes in archival science.
Under the previous educational requirement, 18 out of the 30 semester hours needed to qualify as an archivist must have been in American history, political science, or government - a limitation that often excluded highly qualified candidates with other types of history backgrounds from consideration for NARA jobs. Courses in archival science were not mentioned in the previous educational requirement at all. NARA will now be able to recruit candidates from a broader range of history backgrounds, including world and international history, social and cultural history, and public history. This is important because just as the state of archival education has evolved over the past 40 years, so too have NARA's holdings.
The new educational requirement reads as follows: (A) Bachelor's degree in archival science or bachelor's with a major that includes 18 semester hours in archival science, history and/or in political science or government, and 12 semester hours in one or any combination of the following: archival science, history, American civilization, economics, political science, public administration, or government; or (B) Combination of education and experience - at least 30 semester hours that included courses as shown in A above, plus appropriate experience or additional education.
Additional information on the new standard is available on the OPM web site at http://www.opm.gov./qualifications/SEC-IV/B/GS1400/1420.asp.
4. FBI SEEKS TO REVIEW AND CULL JACK ANDERSON PAPERS According to a 18 April report in the Chronicle of Higher Education, George Washington University is about to receive nearly 200 boxes of papers documenting the life and career of investigative journalist Jack Anderson, but the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) wants access first to scan and pull documents prior to their public release.
It is well known that Anderson, who died last December at age 83, cultivated secret sources throughout the halls of government. He had scores of sources inside government and used their information to document the contents of his "Washington Merry-go-Round" column. His insider sources passed on information that enabled Anderson to investigate and write about Watergate, CIA assassination schemes, and countless other secret operations, many of which have turned into political and institutional scandals for the FBI, CIA, and other national security agencies as well as politicians on both sides of the aisle.
The collection is expected to be a treasure trove of information for journalists and historians. But according to the Chronicle, "the government wants to see the documents before anyone else. Agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation have told university officials and members of the Anderson family that they want to go through the archive, and that agents will remove any item they deem confidential or top secret."
The Chronicle reports that the trustees of the Anderson estate have yet to transfer ownership of the archive to George Washington University but they are outraged and plan to fight the FBI's request. According to Anderson's son Kevin N. Anderson, if Jack Anderson were alive today, he "would probably come out of his skin at the thought of the FBI going through his papers." Furthermore, "If papers were taken -- even if some were stamped "declassified" and returned -- that would "destroy any academic, scholarly, and historic value" of the archive stated Kevin Anderson.
Some libraries and researchers see the FBI's request as part of a renewed emphasis on secrecy in government. According to Duane Webster, executive director of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) the FBI's interest in the Anderson archive is "deeply disturbing and deeply in conflict with the academy's interests in freedom of inquiry, research, and scholarship." Others believe that while the archive may contain some classified information, most of it is likely decades old and have no implications for present day criminal investigations or national security. The FBI, however, asserts that under current law, if there are classified papers in the Anderson archive, those papers remain the property of the United States. Furthermore, officials claim it is a crime for anyone to unlawfully possess still classified documents and that the government is well within statutory mandates to review the collection for such materials.
Although the FBI has yet to detail its plans, sources close to this story report that the FBI is in contact with Justice Department officials and may well seek to subpoena the papers if an agreement cannot be reached with Anderson's family and the university. Then the FBI would have free access to the collection that has yet to be organized and cataloged by George Washington University. In essence, the FBI would have to pick through the entire collection and pull any documents it wished (probably those marked "Confidential" or "Secret") consistent with national security directives.
5. HISTORIANS SWEEP THIS YEAR'S PULITZER PRIZES Historians Kai Byrd and Martin J. Sherwin have won the Pulitzer Prize for biography for their book some 25 years in preparation titled "American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer." Harvard historian Caroline Elkins won the general non-fiction award for "Imperial Reckoning: The Untold Story of Britain's Gulag in Kenya" and David M. Oshinsky won the history award for "Polio: An American Story." Congrats one and all!
6. BITS AND BYTES Item #1 -- ICS "War Powers” Summer Seminar Announced: The Institute for Constitutional Studies at George Washington University has announced that its seventh annual summer seminar for up to fifteen college teachers and advanced graduate students will take place 12-23 June 2006 . The seminar titled "War Powers and the Constitution" will be conducted by historian Richard H. Kohn (UNC-Chapel Hill) and legal scholar Martin Lederman (Georgetown University Law Center). The program is open to graduate students and junior scholars working on any topic relating to the history and/or current controversies surrounding the war powers. Applications are due 12 May. For more information, please visit: http://docs.law.gwu.edu/ics/summerseminar.htm or contact Maeva Marcus, ICS director, at (202) 502-1040 or icsgw@law.gwu.edu.
Item #2 -- State Releases Vietnam FRUS Volume: The Department of State has issued a new volume in the Foreign Relations of the United States series: 1969-1976, volume VI, Vietnam, January 1969-July 1970. The volume is the first of five contemplated volumes that will cover the end of the Vietnam War. Among other things the volume demonstrates that in the early months of 1969 there was no specific plan to end the war. Rather, the Nixon administration searched for ways to demonstrate to the leaders in Hanoi that there was a new "firm hand at the helm" prepared to both talk and fight. The administration also sought to engage the Soviet Union to moderate North Vietnamese behavior, but without much success. The volume, and a summary are available at the Office of the Historian website at: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/nixon/vi <http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/nixon/vi> . Copies of the volume can also be purchased from the U.S. Government Printing Office at http://bookstore.gpo.gov <http://bookstore.gpo.gov> (GPO stock number 044-000-02602-3; ISBN 0-16-075260-4). For further information contact Edward Keefer, General Editor of the Foreign Relations series, at (202) 663-1131; fax (202) 663-1289; e-mail to history@state.gov .
Item #3 -- NEH Announces "We the People Bookshelf" Awards: The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) has awarded free copies of classic books to 2,000 public, school, and military libraries throughout the United States and overseas. Each library selected will receive the 15 classic books on the theme of "Becoming American" from the "We the People Bookshelf", along with copies of three of the titles offered also in Spanish. The books will go to neighborhood, military, and public school libraries as well as libraries at private schools, charter schools, and home school cooperatives throughout the United States, each of which will receive a set of the 15 books, posters, bookmarks, and other promotional materials from NEH through the American Library Association, which is working in partnership with NEH. As part of the award, libraries will hold programs or events to raise awareness of these classic books and engage young readers. This year's Bookshelf enables younger readers to see how America's immigrants have shaped our history and culture and to examine from many perspectives what it means to become an American. For additional information on this year's awards go to www.humanities.gov .
7. ARTICLES OF INTEREST One posting this week: In "Washington's Museums: Worth the Price of Admission?" there is a discussion of the pros and cons of charging admission to the Smithsonian – a revenue enhancement measure recently advocated by several member of Congress to help address the institutions financial woes. The article poses the question: "If the price of admission were even just $1 would this change the magic of the Smithsonian?"