EPA leaks personal data of more than 80,000 farms to Left-Wing Environmental groups

read about it.

meat-eating is going to go the way of the dodo one of these centuries, in any case

 

I don't understand the pattern you are referring to. Are you ragging on the government for holding onto too much information, or dissemniating too much? It's not so clear from the multiple threads you start with regards to everything negative about the Administration.

 

In the D&D forum? Yes.

 

Farm families are under attack! Nooooooooo!

 

FOIA doesn't entitle you to the personal information of private citizens, JFC.

Every federal agency clearly has an unspoken directive to go after the political enemies of the Obama administration and do favors for political allies (like enviro groups).

They are out of control.

 

what are they going to do? go tip their cows?
(insert farley and spade scene here)

 

Wow, it's like the machine has hit another gear or something.

 

WOW!!! That Obama is pretty good. And here we all thought he was some inept community organizer in over his head. Does he have like vulcan mind meld powers to make people do his bidding?

 

He need not say anything, just foster an Alinsky/Daley culture of using power to reward/punish friends and enemies. It's endemic now.

 

That brotha got talent!

 

The government also clearly states that it ordinarily doesn't give personal information that can be construed as privacy-damaging, but that clearly by definition isn't a red line. As soon as they were pressed on it (and I think they were more pressed on the differences state-to-state but anyways), the EPA redacted it and cowed away.

I think threads like this are pointless because a) there are clearly larger issues regarding privacy that run completely counter to this where the government is sharing much too little and b) it's a hit piece on the EPA, when the EPA has already backed down---and thus it does fit a pattern---of manufacturing irrelevant scandal.

 

No, the pattern is misuse and/or abuse of power with no consequence.

At best we might get a "whoops, our bad".

 

Your at best happened, you got a "whoops, our bad" and the EPA redacted documents.

so, no, it doesn't fit into that pattern.

Why is this a flashpoint? Were mistakes made? Yes. Were they acknowledged? Yes. Were there corrective steps taken? Yes.

rag on the admin all you want for a mistake that was definitely not coordinated by anybody too high up, that had the Admin. back down and rectify their mistake, as a lack of consequence

like i said, irrelevant scandal manufacturing. somewhat of a pity considering what are very real scandals happening.

 

That's silly, the documents are already out in the public domain. All the EPA did was ask if you have personal info to delete it.

Was anyone named? Was anyone disciplined? Suspended? Fired?

Just like with the Romney donor leaks from the IRS, "whoops, won't happen again" and everyone stays fat and happy.

The EPA is also discriminating against conservative groups, just like the IRS:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...tive-groups-amid-irs-scandal/?intcmp=HPBucket

 

this constant denigration of EPA employees and professors as "fat" makes me seriously question your sense of wealth.

In any case, we probably don't know about that, but if you want blood for "the leak of personal details of farm families", I'm sure that can be arranged.

as for FOIA waivers---

Current Departmental fees are:

Sierra Club fat cats getting that $25 discount!

you can argue shadowy intent---

but how about you take a look at the requirements for a FOIA waiver http://www.epa.gov/foia/waivers.html---and then look at the "liberal" groups requesting it and the "conservative" ones, before you raise an irrelevant stink.

 

please, he's only half brother.

 

Fees under FOIA are complicated.

There are three things an agency can charge for:

For instance, if you make a request for say, the decision records for an EIS, it's relatively easy as the records are likely already in one place and the duplication costs are all that you would face. If you ask for say, all records that have anything to do with the White House or Al Gore, that's a significant amount of search time and consequently, a huge cost.

My guess is that liberal groups are more interested in decisions and documents that lead to those decisions and conservatives are more interested in fishing around EPA for something. Big difference.

As to the waivers, there are two categories with six standards:

Each of the 2+6 have extensive guidance provided by DOJ on how to interpret the language. (I should note that the guidance rarely changes between administrations, though the applications might be tweaked.)
See: http://www.justice.gov/oip/foia_updates/Vol_VIII_1/viii1page2.htm

In short, fee waiver determinations can be complicated and if Liberal groups are asking for records they think likely to exist and Conservatives are filing all kinds of wingnut requests, it would be entirely expected that EPA would charge the Righties more often.

By the way, most agencies will talk with the requester to try and narrow the scope of an overly-broad (and thus costly) request. I bet this doesn't work with a lot of Con groups.