WASHINGTON — Sen. Kit Bond's proposal to crack down on government employees who leak sensitive information has prompted an outcry from news-media organizations that fear his plan could hinder newsgathering.
Earlier this month, the Missouri Republican introduced a bill that would make it easier to prosecute federal employees for disclosing classified data. The measure would alter current law by eliminating the government's need to prove that a leak damaged national security.
"If made law, this proposal would make it dramatically more difficult for the public to learn whether or not its government is acting efficiently, appropriately and legally," said Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press in Arlington, Va. "It is dangerously overbroad, imprecise and quite honestly, it fills me with horror."
The bill, which already has 11 Republican co-sponsors, revives a nearly identical measure approved by Congress in 2000. President Clinton vetoed the earlier bill after heavy lobbying by news-media groups.
Government workers, contractors or anyone who has signed a nondisclosure agreement with the federal government could be prosecuted under Bond's bill if they "knowingly and willfully" disclose classified information to someone who is not authorized to receive it.
Bond said yesterday that recent news-media reports of secret government surveillance programs have "instilled a sense among some government employees that they can talk publicly about anything that is supposed to be classified without any fear of punishment."
Bond dismissed media concerns, saying the restrictions would not crimp reporting because they cover only classified material.
"There is no reason for anybody to be talking about our most sensitive intelligence collection methods to anybody, whether its the media or somebody else," Bond said yesterday.
But Pete Weitzel, coordinator of the Coalition of Journalists for Open Government, said the bill would have a chilling effect on the free flow of information between journalists and their government sources, tilting the playing field in favor of executive branch control of the news.
"It is certain to create an icy chill, if not a freeze, among sources and potential sources other than those engaged in official, sanctioned leaking," Weitzel wrote in a recent e-mail alert to members, which include the American Society of Newspaper Editors and Associated Press Managing Editors.
Weitzel claims the bill could discourage whistleblowers from coming forward to report government waste, fraud or abuse for fear of being prosecuted if the information is classified.
Bond called that claim nonsense, saying whistleblowers concerned about revealing sensitive data can always turn to the Department of Justice, inspectors general at government agencies or the intelligence committees of Congress.
Bond and others have condemned newspapers like The New York Times for revealing the details of secret government programs that eavesdrop on Americans' international communications or tap financial records to track terror financing.
He defended his bill as a necessary means to keep the country safe from terrorist attacks.
"I do not believe the people, if they understand the seriousness of this message, would say it's more important to revive the sagging circulation of newspapers, and perhaps get them a Pulitzer Prize, than to keep their country safe," Bond said.
The Missouri Press Association chimed in against the bill last week, arguing its affect would not be limited to large newspapers.
"Smaller weekly and daily newspapers routinely report on matters involving classified information, most frequently as it related to local military installations," Doug Crews, MPA's executive director, said in a letter to Bond. "We urge you to consider the issue as part of this larger context."