National Archives reticent about broadening mission

Chafing at Bush administration secrecy, congressional Democrats are handing the National Archives and Records Administration new jobs promoting government transparency. Officials at the records agency appear to be balking at taking on unfunded mandates beyond their traditional role. If Congress wants the Archives to become open-government cops, archivists may prefer to remain librarians.

Comment on this article in The Forum."They have always had a narrow view of their mandate and have never been particularly inclined to seek any expansion," said Patrice McDermott of OpentheGovernment.org, a coalition of groups urging government transparency. "They see their mission as providing access to historical records. They see [overseeing] contemporaneous records as a shift."

A bill updating the Freedom of Information Act, signed Dec. 31 by President Bush, created an Office of Government Information Services within NARA to help set federal FOIA policy. Another measure, backed by House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Henry Waxman and expected to clear the House soon, gives the Archives a new role overseeing agencies' preservation of electronic records. The bill requires NARA to monitor White House e-mail archiving and report results to Congress, replacing a system where archivists take responsibility for records after presidents leave office.

Through an executive order last month, the Archives received responsibility for standardizing "controlled unclassified information" designations used by federal agencies. NARA has temporary funding to start that work. But critics accuse the Archives of privately pushing to duck the e-mail and FOIA tasks. "They are going to sabotage it," said Thomas Blanton, director of the George Washington University's National Security Archive.

At a May 14 Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Financial Management Subcommittee hearing, Blanton argued NARA "went along with" a proposal in the president's FY09 budget to move the new FOIA office to the Justice Department. Sponsors of the FOIA bill, led by Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, have vowed to block the move, which they called an effort to undermine the bill.

At an April 23 House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing, Archives officials questioned the constitutionality and cost of the e-mail bill. Paul Wester, head of NARA's modern records program, said Congress telling NARA to oversee a sitting president's records management might raise separation of power issues. Though NARA officials said they will do any job Congress gives them, critics argued the officials' statements signal reluctance.

A NARA spokeswoman declined to describe the agency's position on the e-mail or FOIA bills, which so far lack funding. But she said the agency, which has a proposed FY09 budget of about $400 million, struggles with an ever-increasing number of records. "The National Archives operates on a very tight budget. ... Whenever we get another responsibility, it means we need to find money to undertake it," she said.

But while conceding budget shortfalls, critics say NARA's reluctance to expand its job is less financial than cultural. "NARA traditionally has not viewed itself as an enforcement entity but rather one that focuses upon collegiality and relationships," National Archives Inspector General Paul Brachfeld said at the May 14 hearing. Lawmakers are handing NARA new jobs because they consider the agency to be nonpartisan and professional. In becoming a records cop, NARA risks hurting that reputation. But critics say it is the agency best positioned to ensure access to government information.