Open government advocates should keep fighting Cheney

As the Republican controlled Congress moves to adopt President Bush's national energy policy -- highlighted by a proposal to drill for oil in the Arctic wildlife refuge -- the American people still do not know how that policy was developed.
And if this week's ruling by an appeals court goes unchallenged, we will never know. Indeed, the reality is that any disclosure is a long-shot at best, even if the case makes it to the U.S. Supreme Court. But this issue is too important for advocates of open government to throw in the towel.
At the very least, an appeal will keep alive the national debate that was triggered in 2001 when Vice President Dick Cheney appointed an energy task force to assist the administration in developing its energy policy. Cheney, some Cabinet-level and other senior administration officials and support staff met frequently with energy industry representatives and only on a limited basis with scholars and environmentalists.
When the task force issued its final report in May 2001, such items as expanded oil and gas drilling on public lands and easing of regulatory barriers to build nuclear power plants were included. This led many Americans to wonder who was at the table when the policy was being developed.
How was it that the proposal for drilling in the Arctic wildlife refuge became a centerpiece of the president's energy initiative?
The White House built a seemingly impenetrable wall around the panel and not only refused to make public the names of the task force members, but fought all public disclosure of pertinent documents.
Even members of Congress were unable to get any details about the meetings.
Taxpayer dollars
The General Accounting Office, Congress' investigative arm, not only was unable to find out how much influence the oil industry had in formulating the policy, but was unable to determine how much money -- taxpayer dollars -- various agencies spent on creating the national energy policy.
The administration argued that being forced to make public any information would have a chilling effect on the president's ability to formulate the best policy for the American people.
A federal judge and an appeals court have supported the White House's position. In a unanimous decision, the eight judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia Circuit said that "the president must be free to seek confidential information from many sources, both inside the government and outside." The judges also stressed the necessity of protecting the separation of powers for the executive branch.
The ruling this week obviously was a major victory for one of the most secret administrations in recent history -- but it was a defeat for the American people.
At a time of intense pressure on the federal government by special interests, having oil and gas industry representatives actually at the table when policy was being formulated was influence peddling at its extreme.
This case was never about demanding to know what goes on in the White House every minute of the day. It was and still is about giving the American people a peek into the development of important national policy.
But the Bush administration is determined to keep things under wraps. And that troubles us.
Even if the chances of an appeal are slim to none, the plaintiffs should keep up the legal fight so the public debate on open government can continue.