April 10, 2008 4:40 PM PDT

FBI nudges state 'fusion centers' into the shadows

WASHINGTON -- The FBI is pressuring states to become more secretive and limit even routine oversight of the bureau's data-sharing arrangements with local police, a new document shows.

A memorandum of understanding written by the FBI and signed by the state of Virginia in February 2008 aims to curb congressional and press oversight of a joint venture called a Fusion Center. Here's more on Fusion Centers.

The memorandum, obtained by the Electronic Privacy Information Center and released on Friday, says that any "disclosure" to Congress of information shared with the Fusion Center can happen only "after consultation with the FBI." It also says that requests from media organizations even for non-classified material made under Virginia's open government laws will be referred to the FBI and then strongly opposed.

It also indicates that the FBI is responsible for a Virginia state bill called HB1007 -- introduced two days after the FBI signed the memorandum on January 6 -- that would exempt the Fusion Center from open government laws.

That bill is worrisome. It rewrites open government laws to say that even non-classified statistics about the total number of investigations targeting "an individual who or organization which is reasonably suspected of involvement in criminal activity" will be exempt from disclosure to news organizations and the public.

Nobody wants truly confidential or classified information to be disclosed (except, perhaps, to the historians of the next generation). But the Virginia proposal goes too far, and exempts even reports and statistics that could show overzealous surveillance and other possible misbehavior by Fusion Center staff.

In reality, there's no need to amend Virginia's open government law; it already includes a slew of can't-disclose-these exemptions including "public safety" records, anti-terrorist plans, and reports given to "state and local law enforcement agencies."

This hasn't stopped police from misrepresenting what's going on. "Federal agencies aren't going to share with us classified information if they think we're going to share that information," Capt. Tom Martin, commander of the Virginia State Police Criminal Intelligence Division and the administrative head of the Fusion Center, told the Virginian-Pilot. "We're going to protect it."

If Martin and the other Fusion Center honchos want a narrow state law reiterating that classified information can't be disclosed, perhaps it makes sense to enact one. But that's a far cry from HB1007's broad exceptions, and not an argument that the currently-proposed law is either wise or necessary.

Recent posts from The Iconoclast
FBI's Net surveillance proposal raises privacy, legal concerns
Transcript: FBI director on surveillance of 'illegal' Internet activity
FBI, politicos renew push for ISP data retention laws
Shamos: Why e-voting paper trails are a bad idea
FBI nudges state 'fusion centers' into the shadows
Add a Comment (Log in or register) 8 comments (Page 1 of 1)
Freedom? Where's it gone?
by ewelch April 10, 2008 5:28 PM PDT
As senator Huey Lone once said, "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in an American flag." Well, the FBI is certainly doing its part.
Reply to this comment
We live in a police state. What's new?
by Freiheit13 April 10, 2008 6:21 PM PDT
Gee, you mean our government of, by and for the people wants to limit access to information which could potentially show they're not playing by the rules? I don't believe it.
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
FBI is absolutely in the wrong here
by Dr_Zinj April 11, 2008 7:19 AM PDT
The damages caused by this obsessive secrecy of this government organization far outweigh any good done by them. Carte blanche access with no oversight means constant abuse of power with no means of correction. Who will watch the guardians indeed! All you need to do is look at the FBI under Hoover, and more recently, their behavior over the Winter Hill Gang in Boston and the murder of Roger Wheeler to see that they still abuse their power in harrassing and allowing the deaths of innocent Americans. Finally, no federal government agency should be allowed to propose ANY law. That is a strict violation of the seperation of powers. That's not to say that an employee can't privately propose a law through his or her elected representative, just that the agency itself cannot.
Reply to this comment
Read the MOU: This Isn't Shadowy
by Len Bullard April 11, 2008 8:21 AM PDT
Reading the Virginia/FBI MOU, this seems to apply to FBI intelligence and operations information provided to the center. NIEM provides guidance and White House Memoranda lay out the core principles. What the policy said is that requests for classified or protected information are handled jointly by the agencies. That's good policy. Otherwise, they will never share information and the failure to share information is precisely what made 9/11 possible. I understand the concerns, Declan, but do get a sense of how the US agencies have to coordinate to secure us. It isn't all big brother. It can become that, assuredly, but that is more likely to come from electing bad public officials than from some secret cabal of civil servants. They aren't that good at caballing or being civil. :-) Google knows more about your private lives than these centers do, and there are very few working policies or laws restricting what they do about it. If you need to worry, that is what you should worry about. The Federal, State and Local law enforcement databases already operate under strict regulations and guidelines. Good article, though. Part of keeping our freedoms is oversight but don't lash out needlessly unless and until you have good evidence of malfeasance. Paranoia is like fungus; it spreads far from the source of origin and chokes what would otherwise be healthy activities.
Reply to this comment
The Truth is Out There
by DrDredd April 18, 2008 2:25 PM PDT
I bet Mulder and Scully wouldn't have put up with this nonsense.
Reply to this comment
by eng.dan May 8, 2008 5:28 PM PDT
all very disturbing
Reply to this comment
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement
Click Here
  • About The Iconoclast

  • Declan McCullagh has covered politics, technology, and Washington, D.C. for over a decade, which has turned him into an iconoclast and a skeptic of anyone who says: "We oughta have a new federal law against this."

Add this feed to your online news reader
Google
Yahoo
MSN

Latest blog posts from News.com

Featured blogs

Beyond Binary by Ina Fried A look at how technology is changing our lives and at the people behind all that life-changing stuff.

Coop's Corner by Charles Cooper Charles Cooper weighs in on Silicon Valley hijinks, and he doesn't suffer fools gladly.

Defense in Depth by Robert Vamosi Covering the latest in computer viruses and computer crime.

Geek Gestalt by Daniel Terdiman At the tech culture nexus of video games, fire art, and virtual worlds.

Green Tech Fresh green tech news and commentary.

One More Thing by Tom Krazit Tom Krazit takes on the tech phenomenon that is Apple, and keeps a close watch on the chip industry.

Outside the Lines by Dan Farber When business and technology meet, that's when things get interesting.

The Social by Caroline McCarthy Exploring all facets of social media and tech culture.

Underexposed by Stephen Shankland Coverage of digital photography, science, and open-source software.

Resource center from News.com sponsors

advertisement
Click Here
On TV.com: MILEY CYRUS photographs
Advanced
search
Advanced
search
Visit other CNET Networks sites: