Former White House counsel associate Scott Coffina accused U.S.
Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar of violating the Hatch Act during a
recent campaign trip to Colorado.
The Colorado Observer broke the story of the possible Hatch Act violation today.
Salazar, along with Sen. Udall, Sen. Bennet, and Gov. Hickenlooper
participated in an RV tour of Colorado in support of President Obama’s
reelection. As reported by the Colorado Observer, the Montrose County Democratic
Party listed the RV tour stop featuring Salazar on its website. In
the event listing
Salazar was billed as the Secretary of the Interior, a possible
violation of the Hatch Act’s prohibition on engaging in partisan
political activity while acting in the capacity of a civil servant. Media Trackers consulted legal sources familiar with Hatch Act
violations who agreed to comment on background. Media Trackers’ source
stated that if Salazar “took time off to go on the campaign trail, he
will not have violated the Hatch Act.” The source continued saying,
“If, however, he used government resources for the travel or was on the
government clock, then Secretary Salazar, like Secretary Sebelius before
him, would be guilty.” Media Trackers has filed a FOIA request with the
Dept. of Interior to obtain Salazar’s calendar and travel arrangements
surrounding the Obama RV tour...
more
1 comment:
Why are the FOIA RULES BEING CHANGE NOW.causeofaction.org/2012/11/07/the-colorado-observer-watchdog- - 46k - Similar pages
Press Release: Cause of Action Files Hatch Act Complaint Against ...
Nov 1, 2012 ... Cause of Action Files Hatch Act Complaint Against Interior Sec. Ken Salazar Did
Salazar Campaign for President Obama While On Official ...
causeofaction.org/2012/11/01/press-release-cause-of-action-f - 45k - Similar pages
Lapdog Media Ignores Possible Hatch Act Violations « Monkey ...
Nov 2, 2012... Interior Secretary Ken Salazar for possible Hatch Act violations. ... Note that the
Freedom of Information Act document requests aimed at ...
monkeywrenchingamerica.com/?p=1967
you tell me.......
Interior Dept. to revise Freedom of Information Act
Posted: Nov 7, 2012
Comment Deadline: November 13, 2012
The Department of Interior has released a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that would revise the regulations that the Department follows in processing Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) requests.
FOIA first took effect in 1967, and was intended to increase transparency in government. The Act allows people to request and, with a few exceptions, receive access to the records of any federal agency. Agencies are also required to disclose certain information, such as frequently requested records. FOIA authority resides in the Executive Branch, and agency compliance is overseen by the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy.
The NPRM has not been deemed a significant rule, and is not projected to have significant impact on the economy or the environment. Changes made to FOIA, however, may have implications that could affect the democratic process more generally.
The proposed revisions could impact the process in three major areas. First, it could affect the procedures the Department follows in responding to FOIA requests. Second, the revisions serve to clarify and incorporate statutory changes to FOIA (such as under the OPEN Government Act of 2007) as well as changes to FOIA that have resulted from case law. Third, the revisions include current cost figures to be used in determining fees. The cost of scanning records will increase from thirteen to fifteen cents a page. However, in the hope of increasing the amount of information people can receive in a FOIA request without being charged a processing fee, the amount at or below which the Department will not charge a fee will increase from $30.00 to $50.00.
In addition, the Department hopes to improve transparency and ease of access via changes to the language and structure of the Act. Such changes include providing partial fee waivers and shifting towards a more nuanced, multi-track approach to processing requests.
Learn more about FOIA.
Read more about the proposed rule.
Comment on the proposed rule.
Post a Comment