- Lawmakers demand answers from Doan on proposed IG cut - Advisory Committee On The Records Of Congress Approves Report - Secrecy and Foreign Policy Patrice McDermott, Director OpenTheGovernment.org 202-332-OPEN (6736) www.openthegovernment.org http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SENATE_SECRET_MEETINGS?SITE=FLROC&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT - LAWMAKERS DEMAND ANSWERS FROM DOAN ON PROPOSED IG CUT http://www.fcw.com/article97027-12-06-06-Web Congress is upset about the General Services Administration's proposals to cut its inspector general's budget and send auditing duties to private companies, and lawmakers are letting GSA Administrator Lurita Doan know it. Several lawmakers have denounced the proposals and want explanations. Disappointed senators sent Doan a letter today wanting to know her reasons for the proposals, and three Democrats on the House Government Reform Committee - including incoming Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) - requested Dec. 5 that Doan cancel her decision to move pre-award audits to the private sector. [...] On Oct. 19, Doan announced she would move oversight to small 8(a) audit firms. One of her goals for 2007 is to balance the role of the IG because firms have concerns about the office's oversight. "Our contracting personnel spend so much time responding to the IG, and there is a certain 'fear factor' that enters into that," she said. She questioned how many pre-award audits are needed. If GSA and the IG conduct audits, Doan said it would waste money because the IG uses appropriated funds. Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) want a detailed estimate of expected savings from the budget cut and how the cut will hinder the IG. They asked Doan for an analysis of her decision to move audits to outside contractors and whether that would lead to an independent analysis of GSA's contracts, according to the letter. Waxman and Reps. James Oberstar (D-Minn.) and Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) wrote that Doan's proposal to send auditing jobs to private companies risks conflicts of interest, especially with small businesses that often subcontract with the larger firms they would audit. Moreover, the private sector could be impaired from accessing proprietary business information, which companies do not easily release. IGs have authority in that area. [...] *** *** http://www.fcw.com/article96964-12-04-06-Print Webcasting offers window into government More municipalities use the technology to put public meetings and training videos online BY Aliya Sternstein Published on Dec. 4, 2006 As the 2006 election campaign season proved, the public turns to the Web for unfiltered government information, especially for candid video footage of federal officials. Local governments are now attempting to establish credibility with citizens and employees by creating online public records in video form. Municipalities are Webcasting public meetings, firefighter training videos and other governmental communications. The idea is to offer a live window into government operations - and easy-to-use documentation for future reference. Some people are suspicious of government entities, and the longer they take to answer questions, the more suspicious people grow, said Frank Clifton, county manager for Onslow County, N.C. The county began Webcasting public meetings live in August, and it also archives them online. Now when someone is concerned about something the county government discussed or voted on, "I can go in and pull up that meeting and let them see it for themselves," Clifton said. He chose to outsource hosting and archival operations to Granicus, a streaming media service provider. Since 1999, Granicus has been catering specifically to local governments. Those governments often do not have enough bandwidth to meet multiple requests from developers, lawyers, the media and agency employees. Webcasting "creates a public record for us. The written minutes are there alongside of the video" in a word processing document, Clifton said. "It facilitates records management and responding to requests for information. We just refer lawyers to the Internet." To generate and manage the Webcasts in-house, Onslow County would have needed to develop complex synchronization software and distribute video files to Web users. That would have cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Clifton said the costs would have outweighed the benefits, whereas the cost of Granicus' quick and easy service was justifiable. The upfront fee was about $26,000. The monthly fee for the service is $1,100. With the software platform, Clifton can transmit a video, tape, CD or DVD one time to a secure facility at a Granicus site in San Francisco. Granicus' San Francisco site distributes and stores the content to reduce the strain on Onslow County's bandwidth. No user traffic flows over the local government's Internet connection. This is all invisible to users, who get access to the content directly from the Onslow County Web site. In Long Beach, Calif., just a handful of streaming requests could bring down the city's entire Internet connectivity, said Long Beach officials, who now use Granicus. Local governments are also taking advantage of multimedia tools to communicate better internally. Tom Spengler, Granicus' chief executive officer, said 15 percent of the company's work involves streaming videos of training programs and intragovernmental communications internally to private government Web sites. The distribution process works the same way it does to conserve bandwidth for public Web sites. Berkeley, Calif., has eliminated the need to repeat retirement benefits classes four times a year by posting a single video on the city's intranet. New city employees can watch whenever they want and immediately download the necessary forms via links on the video's Web page. The company also gives customers the option of storing their material on Granicus' servers longer than the standard 12 months. When Sacramento County, Calif., needed to store sensitive content, it purchased multiple storage vaults and applied security controls to the vaults that contain the sensitive material. The system can restrict access to only authorized password holders or authorized IP ranges. "Security is always becoming a bigger and bigger factor in what our customers want to do," Spengler said. With Granicus, the files are recorded in Windows Media format and automatically indexed, he said. Government officials and citizens can search the archive by resolution number, date or keyword and go straight to the video segments they want to watch. Webcasting more affordable for local governments Open government advocates say local government Webcasting has increased because the cost of streaming video has decreased in the past year. "It's become a lot more affordable for folks to use Webcasting to see what was said and how people said it, as opposed to just written format," said Ari Schwartz, deputy director of the nonprofit research group Center for Democracy and Technology. He said the video-sharing Web site YouTube has also boosted Webcasting's appeal. Schwartz said some cities and counties have devised in-house systems. "For podcasting, all you need is a good microphone and an MP3 player," he said. But government organizations must be wary of security and privacy risks, Schwartz said. They need to be careful with third-party providers to ensure that the government maintains ownership of all content, he said. Schwartz recommends that officials include language in the contract to dictate what happens to the material if the company dissolves. Government officials also need to ensure that people can access archived footage after a change in administration, he said. "Even from Republican committee chair to Republican committee chair, we've lost the data when the new chair comes in" on government Web sites, Schwartz said. "What happens when you get a whole new party in charge? Just losing the link to it means it's inaccessible." *** - ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE RECORDS OF CONGRESS APPROVES REPORT NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 12, #47; 8 December 2006) by R. Bruce Craig and Lee White (Co-editors) http://www.h-net.org/~nch/ On 4 December 2006, the Advisory Committee for the Records of Congress conducted its last meeting of the 109th Congress. Following opening comments by Clerk of the House Karen Hass and Secretary of the Senate Emily Reynolds, and after the update report by the Archivist of the United States Allen Weinstein, the committee addressed the principal agenda item -- approval of the 4th report of the Committee for transmission to Congress. The report is mandated by Congress to be issued every five years. This year's report highlights four critical developments relating to Congressional records: it details the progress being made in providing guidance in records management and support for the preservation of official and personal papers of members; it discusses recent advances in electronic record keeping; it describes the activities of the Association of Centers for the Study of Congress; and it discusses the effort to complete the Capitol Visitor Center, a project that seeks to make the Capitol building a much more visitor-friendly environment. The full report will be accessible at the Archives.gov website where it will be posted early in the 110th Congress. The committee also discussed various initiatives relating to the preservation of the records generated by the 109th Congress. NARA representatives reported that committee records were being transferred to the archives and that a concerted effort was being made to see to it that departing members' papers were being preserved in various private repositories. The committee learned, for example, that all but one outgoing senator has already made arrangements for preservation of personal and political papers. Center for Legislative Archives director Richard Hunt added that action had been taken to capture Congressional websites as they appeared at the end of the 109th Congress and that these "snapshots" of websites would be preserved and made available to scholars for research purposes. A good deal of the meeting was devoted to reflections of the various committee members who, now that the Democrats have captured control of the House and Senate will rotate off the committee. When the 110th Congress convenes, a new House Clerk and Secretary of the Senate will also be appointed to lead the advisory committee next Congress. One can only hope that the next committee will be as productive as this one was. *** - SECRECY AND FOREIGN POLICY http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/3774 Robert Pallitto | December 8, 2006 Since the beginning of the republic, U.S. presidents have used some form of secrecy in the course of governing. In the wake of the Watergate scandal, congressional hearings in the 1970s and the disclosure of covert U.S. programs of assassination and destabilization overseas temporarily reduced the scope of secret activities sponsored by the executive branch. From the 1980s on, however, presidents have come to rely increasingly on secrecy-related practices. Though the U.S. Constitution does not explicitly grant executive secrecy in the list of Article II powers, presidents have increased their powers through legislation, the federal courts' recognition of legal defenses to conceal information, and responses to the ongoing threat of terrorism. [...]