The FOIA is more bad then good, but was it intended for the public good?

[Anarchist420]

I question whether the FOIA was well intended knowing that person who signed it was the one who carried out the gulf of tonkin incident. Why was the FOIA created and signed by LBJ?

If it was well-intended, then LBJ may have had too big of a heart and too small of a mind. However, I believe it is more likely that he did it to protect the executive power and himself specifically as well as to attempt to hide the fact that he did the Gulf of Tonkin incident... he was embarrassed and probably didn't even understand the FOIA when he signed it. Due to the FOIA, things like Pearl Harbor could remain secret to the executive and even then the executive may not know what is going on until it is too late. We will never have a true version of 9/11 because of the FOIA. The market builds a better consensus and the FOIA may have made the terrorist attacks of 9/11 possible. There are many many competing theories on that and that's because of the FOIA.

That said, people who have bigger hearts than minds or vice versa should never be executives (and neither should I). I've come to hate Lincoln and his Hitler less than most other authoritarians because I can at least see some logic in their ideas ideas even if I don't agree with them. Hitler and Lincoln at least applied logic so they didn't have any excuses... they were the bad man with the bad plan. FDR, on the other hand, had no original thought of his own and he wound up fusing his cousin's progressivism (national socialism) with Wilson's modern liberalism and corrupting the nation while doing so. He didn't even realize that Mussolini corrupted the Original fascism. It's really sad and scary that FDR was innocent while Hitler/Lincoln pleaded guilty on their own. Hierarchical centralization of power in a single executive corrupts too many people regardless of the institution.

The reasons as to why the FOIA was bad for liberty should be obvious to everyone, so enough said there.

 

[monovillage]

I have to disagree with you that the Freedom of Information Act is bad for liberty. In this country knowing what your government is doing with your tax dollars and in your name is too important to allow them (the government) to hide and conceal their actions.

 

[Jaskalas]

Hierarchical centralization of power in a single executive corrupts too many people regardless of the institution.

The reasons as to why the FOIA was bad for liberty should be obvious to everyone, so enough said there.

I'd like to hear how FOIA is bad, and wtf it has to do with "Hierarchical centralization of power".

I have to assume you think FOIA has failed in its purpose, because I don't want to think you disagree with an open and honest government.

 

[Juror No. 8]

The FOIA serves to provide the illusion of an open, transparent government. Because even if the government engages in secret, illegal activities, the people at least believe they have the ability to find out about those activities. Basically, it's like this:

The Myth: "The FOIA means we have, by law, an open and honest government, even if it doesn't want to be open and honest!"

The Reality: The government can simply ignore or refuse FOI requests and there's little anybody can do about it.

 

[Anarchist420]

I have to disagree with you that the Freedom of Information Act is bad for liberty. In this country knowing what your government is doing with your tax dollars and in your name is too important to allow them (the government) to hide and conceal their actions.

I have to assume you think FOIA has failed in its purpose, because I don't want to think you disagree with an open and honest government. __________________

It sucks because it competes with what market level investigators can do. What Juror No. 8 said was right. The FOIA also requires the federal budget to be higher, meaning that it makes taxes higher, so I'm not sure what you mean when you say "our tax dollars owe us an accountable govt". I haven't searched for a study on how much govt corruption has increased since the FOIA was signed by Lyin' Lyndon, but I'm sure govt corruption has increased disproportionately since FOIA went into effect. Not to mention the FOIA inherently provides a loophole for the govt to act in more secrecy and not store the records. Wikileaks exposes the US gov more than the US gov could expose itself. Why would the US gov expose itself anymore than the market could? Govs can't admit their mistakes... only individuals can.

I'd like to hear how FOIA is bad, and wtf it has to do with "Hierarchical centralization of power".

With FOIA, Congress gave the power to the executive (the independent Head of state and more powerful than the supreme court and Congress) to determine what the executive wants people to know.

FOIA was dangerous to liberty, plain and simple.

The FOIA serves to provide the illusion of an open, transparent government. Because even if the government engages in secret, illegal activities, the people at least believe they have the ability to find out about those activities. Basically, it's like this: The Myth: "The FOIA means we have, by law, an open and honest government, even if it doesn't want to be open and honest!" The Reality: The government can simply ignore or refuse FOI requests and there's little anybody can do about it.

+1. Thanks