The Congressional Research Service is jousting with an influential public interest group over the extent to which CRS reports should be made available to the public.
Last week, CRS officials abruptly closed a little known Web address, http://thomas.loc.gov/erp/crsquery.html, after officials learned the Federation of American Scientists knew of the site. The address contained a number of links to CRS sites, where unknown to the public, according to the FAS, reports and issue briefs could be downloaded.
The FAS downloaded about 150 reports, mostly on intelligence issues, before the site was closed with a "Forbidden" warning, said analyst Steven Aftergood of the FAS' Secrecy in Government Project.
"We downloaded the cream of the crop and left the cream of the crap," he said.
The FAS, in the current edition of its Secrecy & Government Bulletin, lambastes the CRS for adherence to "an anachronistic secrecy policy that is ripe for reform."
Declared the FAS newsletter, "CRS has imposed extraordinary security measures to prevent direct public access to its electronic databases."
CRS Director Daniel Mulhollan was unavailable for comment Monday night. But in a Feb. 18 letter to Aftergood, the director said the FAS viewpoint "suggests a serious misunderstanding on your part with regard to computer security measures utilized by CRS.
"Both Congress and the court ... have upheld CRS' role as a confidential and exclusive advisor to Congress possessed of the same privileges enjoyed by Members and staff involved in the legislative process," Mulhollan wrote.
He added, "Maintaining the constitutional speech or debate protection for CRS is very important to preserve the Service's confidential relationship with the Congress."
CRS reports are usually readily available through a constituent's member of Congress.
"However, there are critical differences between public access through a congressional office and direct distribution of products by CRS," Mulhollan wrote.
Mulhollan sought to assure Aftergood the CRS "employs only those measures which are reasonable, necessary and appropriate to ensure compliance with congressionally mandated policies regarding dissemination."
NEXT STORY: A Golf Oversight?