Albuquerque Journal Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., dismissed notions that a recent measure in Congress criminalizing the release of any classified information amounts to an official secrets act.
October 18, 2000
Rep. Wilson Denies Bill Promotes Secrecy
by John J. Lumpkin
Journal Staff WriterThe measure, which has passed both the House and Senate and is awaiting President Clinton's signature, has been criticized by open government and press groups as potentially stifling to public knowledge of the government's activities.
Wilson, a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said she is concerned that some press leaks have "damaged America" and "compromised some intelligence operations."
"I don't have a problem with (the measure)," she said. "I'm not worried about it."
The provision is part of the 2001 Intelligence Authorization Bill, which Wilson's committee has authority over.
Wilson's Intelligence Committee is privy to reams of information off limits to the public, including details of U.S. intelligence gathering.
Under the measure, a government or military official who is caught intentionally disclosing classified information can be charged with a felony and face up to three years in prison. It would not punish news outlets for publishing the information.
Certain kinds of disclosures are already criminal. People who leak nuclear weapons data or the names of U.S. spies can be charged under existing espionage laws. Government agencies also have administrative punishments such as firing for those who leak confidential information.
Steven Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists, called the congressional measure "intolerably broad" and "an assault on the Constitution."
While he acknowledged the need for laws protecting the identities of spies and nuclear weapons data, he said that the government reported taking some 8 million "classification actions" in 1999 from blacking out a single word in a document to keeping entire budgets off the books.
"What Congress is doing now is saying, 'We don't care what it is or what it's about; if it's classified, it's a crime to disclose it,' '' Aftergood said. "It's an erosion of checks and balances on the executive branch."
An extreme example is that someone could be punished for leaking the CIA's budget for stationery, Aftergood said. The total budget for U.S. intelligence agencies is public it was $26.7 billion in 1998 but any breakdowns of that spending is not.
Wilson said prosecutors should have discretion and wouldn't be likely to take on a case like Aftergood's example.
Another who could be subject to the law: whoever leaked to The Washington Times this week a classified letter from Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin to Vice President Al Gore. Based on the letter, The Times reported this week that Gore may have circumvented nonproliferation laws, at Chernomyrdin's request, by not informing key senators about a nuclear technology transfer from Russia to Iran.
Leaks of some classified information are vital, said Aftergood, especially when "the government doesn't do what it's supposed to."
Copyright© 2000 Albuquerque Journal