URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/10/opinion/10kelley.html
The New York Times
October 10, 2005
Bush's Veil Over History
By KITTY KELLEY
Washington
SECRECY has been perhaps the most consistent trait of the George W.
Bush presidency. Whether it involves refusing to provide the names of
oil executives who advised Vice President Dick Cheney on energy
policy, prohibiting photographs of flag-draped coffins returning from
Iraq, or forbidding the release of files pertaining to Chief Justice
John Roberts's tenure in the Justice Department, President Bush seems
determined to control what the public is permitted to know. And he has
been spectacularly effective, making Richard Nixon look almost
transparent.
But perhaps the most egregious example occurred on Nov. 1, 2001, when
President Bush signed Executive Order 13233, under which a former
president's private papers can be released only with the approval of
both that former president (or his heirs) and the current one.
Before that executive order, the National Archives had controlled the
release of documents under the Presidential Records Act of 1978, which
stipulated that all papers, except those pertaining to national
security, had to be made available 12 years after a president left
office.
Now, however, Mr. Bush can prevent the public from knowing not only
what he did in office, but what Bill Clinton, George H. W. Bush and
Ronald Reagan did in the name of democracy. (Although Mr. Reagan's
term ended more than 12 years before the executive order, the Bush
administration had filed paperwork in early 2001 to stop the clock,
and thus his papers fall under it.)
Bill Clinton publicly objected to the executive order, saying he
wanted all his papers open. Yet the Bush administration has
nonetheless denied access to documents surrounding the 177 pardons
President Clinton granted in the last days of his presidency. Coming
without explanation, this action raised questions and fueled
conspiracy theories: Is there something to hide? Is there more to know
about the controversial pardon of the fugitive financier Marc Rich? Is
there a quid pro quo between Bill Clinton and the Bushes? Is the
current president laying a secrecy precedent for pardons he intends to
grant?
The administration's effort to grandfather the Reagan papers under the
act also raised a red flag. President Bush's signature stopped the
National Archives from a planned release of documents from the Reagan
era, some of which might have shed light on the Iran-contra scandal
and illuminated the role played by the vice president at the time,
George H. W. Bush.
What can be done to bring this information to light? Because executive
orders are not acts of Congress, they can be overturned by future
commanders in chief. But this is a lot to ask of presidents given the
free pass handed them by Mr. Bush. (And it could put a President
Hillary Clinton in a bind when it came to her own husband's papers.)
Other efforts to rectify the situation are equally problematic.
Representative Henry Waxman, Democrat of California, has repeatedly
introduced legislation to overturn Mr. Bush's executive order, but the
chances of a Republican Congress defying a Republican president are
slim.
There is also a lawsuit by the American Historical Association and
other academic and archival groups before the United States District
Court for the District of Columbia. A successful verdict could force
the National Archives to ignore the executive order and begin making
public records from the Reagan and elder Bush administrations.
Unless one of these efforts succeeds, George W. Bush and his father
can see to it that their administrations pass into history without
examination. Their rationales for waging wars in the Middle East will
go unchallenged. There will be no chance to weigh the arguments that
led the administration to condone torture by our armed forces. The
problems of federal agencies entrusted with public welfare during
times of national disaster - 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina - will be
unaddressed. Details on no-bid contracts awarded to politically
connected corporations like Halliburton will escape scrutiny, as will
the president's role in Environmental Protection Agency's policies on
water and air polluters.
This is about much more than the desires of historians and biographers
- the best interests of the nation are at stake. As the American
Political Science Association, one plaintiff in the federal lawsuit,
put it: "The only way we can improve the operation of government,
enhance the accountability of decision-makers and ultimately help
maintain public trust in government is for people to understand how it
worked in the past."
Kitty Kelley is the author of "The Family: The Real Story of the Bush
Dynasty."
* Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company