David WilliamsIt’s getting increasingly difficult for Americans to keep track of their government. On April 3, Politico’s Ben Johansen reported, “Officials at the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] this week shut down several offices tasked with Freedom of Information Act [FOIA] requests, a step billed as consolidation that could weaken transparency.”
Shutting down several FOIA offices at HHS is especially troublesome considering the ambitious and controversial agenda of HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. For example, RFK Jr. promises to find the cause of autism by this September. Full transparency will be needed to “double check” the work.
Meanwhile, (what is left of) the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is “unable at this time to reasonably project” when it will make key records disclosures. This waffling and obfuscating is at odds with FOIA, which requires the government to make timely disclosures unless the requested information falls into one of nine exemptions (e.g., personal privacy concerns). As a global beacon of freedom, the federal government must be honest and open with the American people.
As a taxpayer and consumer watchdog, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance Foundation (TPAF) regularly uses the FOIA process to hold government and government officials accountable. Ramping up FOIA work in 2024, TPAF has taken aim at agencies such as the Internal Revenue Service, Food and Drug Administration, United States Postal Service, and the General Services Administration (GSA) in its FOIA requests.
Multiple requests targeted the IRS’ Direct File program, which alarmingly offers to complete returns (read: minimize deductions and maximize liability) on taxpayers’ behalf. The IRS had reported suspiciously high rates of user satisfaction with a glitch-prone government website, and TPAF was eager to obtain the full array of user reviews. On May 30, TPAF sent a FOIA request to the GSA asking for: “All respondent-written feedback (i.e., open-ended responses) on the Direct File pilot program collected by the Direct File Touchpoints Survey between March 19, 2024 and April 21, 2024.”
TPAF’s understanding was that GSA administered that survey on behalf of the IRS, which is why we chose GSA as the FOIA starting point. The request was passed along to the IRS, which sat on the request past its statutory deadline to answer. The agency ultimately released 465 pages of user survey response data to TPAF, containing close to 13,300 open-ended comments submitted to the IRS as part of this user survey. More than 20% of these comments were negative.
As a Politico overview of the FOIA response noted, “Some users also complained that Direct File would crash, causing them to lose time and progress; that their refunds were lower than in previous years using other preparers; that the chat option was faulty; and that the program didn’t work well on certain internet browsers.” It’s hard to reconcile this level of dissatisfaction with the IRS’ rosy claim of a 90% user satisfaction rating. TPAF succeeded in keeping the IRS honest and will continue to fight against the Direct File boondoggle.
But, it’s been particularly difficult to get secretive agencies such as the USPS to divulge their secrets. In February 2024, TPAF submitted a FOIA to the USPS asking for basic information about the agency’s electric vehicle procurement costs and policies. The following month, the USPS rendered its (non)response. TPAF received procurement contracts for EV chargers, but with heavy redactions that obscured all relevant figures. In addition to citing a slew of court cases to support its secrecy, the USPS stated, “[39 U.S.C. § 410(c)(2)] provides that ‘information of a commercial nature, including trade secrets, whether or not obtained from a person outside the Postal Service, which under good business practice would not be publicly disclosed’ is exempt from the disclosure requirements of the FOIA.”
In other words, the USPS can claim wide latitude to hide anything business-related even if taxpayers are footing the bill. If it wanted to, the USPS could insist that this information be public. Taxpayers are regularly informed about the cost of contracts in other contexts across the government, and it doesn’t seem like the information would significantly impact commercial interests. Any minor annoyance faced by a company having to publish this information would surely be outweighed by its taxpayer-funded payday. The USPS seems to relish in pretending it is the CIA and hiding basic information from the public.
Hopefully, government agencies stop hiding behind office closures, redactions, and excuses and give much-needed insight on their activities. No matter which party is in power, TPAF and other watchdogs will continue to fight for an open government.
David Williams is the president of the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.
Really? And how well were those FOI offices responding to requests? Trump has claimed he is going to make government transparent. If true, we won’t need FOI offices. Right now, Trump is trying to get rid of the useless bureaucratic fat.
You know, I believe this column is just nothing but blarney and BS. And this is why:
The author says HHS shut down several offices regarding the Freedom Of Information process. He maintains that this means the Trump government is in anti-transparency mode.
However, just the fact that several offices were shut down could very well mean there was a redundancy. Thus, several being shut down could very well mean that they were un-needed and by being shut down, saved taxpayer funds.
Mr. Williams writes, “[this as]a step billed as consolidation that could weaken transparency.”
In addition, the closing could be attempt to stop unwarranted and dishonest leaking-as was being done by the staff of Pete Hegseth.
These are just two conclusion that can be drawn. Yes, there could be another that has the conclusion that transparency is being obliterated by the Trump regime. But, as I mentioned, this is highly unlikely, if several offices were shut down, mainly because it implies there are still other offices that are invested with uncovering misdeeds.
The fact that the author never seems to recognize this point alerts me to the fact that he is either being unintentionally disingenuous or deliberately deceptive on this point.
My conclusion: It would be nice if the author of this column engaged in a little more transparency himself.
By the way, citing Politico, a left wing self-important rag, that is often disingenuous, untrue in the facts it presents and needs a big dose of fact-checking itself, is not the best-in my opinion-authoratative source of honest journalism.
It is nice that TPAF does works for the Taxpaying public. And it does a very good job, I believe. But after reading the author’s opening paragraph, I wonder at its competence.