The controversy over then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of private email as a public figure is inspiring a debate over who conducts public business on private email and what that means for good government and accountability.
It’s a debate we as a country need to have. A trend seems to be developing of government officials who use private email, either allegedly or without doubt for official business. That has negative implications for the public’s right to know how public business is conducted and how taxpayer dollars are spent.
I was critical of the current Labor secretary for using private email to conduct Justice Department business while he was at the Justice Department. He ultimately faced a House committee subpoena over the emails. Similarly, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network at the Treasury Department should respond completely to my inquiry on whistleblower allegations that top employees were communicating on unofficial electronic devices using alternate email addresses.
When I was investigating the government’s controversial Fast and Furious program, allowing guns to travel among potential criminals in Mexico as a law enforcement tracking tactic, the head of the Justice Department’s criminal division at the time, Lanny Breuer, forwarded a draft of the Justice Department’s response to me to his personal email account. Despite having received the draft letter four times, and complimenting the author at one point, he continued to downplay his knowledge of the scandal and the letter, which the Justice Department withdrew over “inaccuracies.” This contributed to my call for his resignation.
Long before the current news about State Department email, in 2013, I began looking at federal agencies’ use of a Special Government Employee designation allowing employees to serve both the government and a private sector employer. News reports at the time described the potentially questionable use of the designation for a top aide to Secretary Clinton. Part of my inquiry asked for any correspondence between the State Department and a firm in news reports at the time called Teneo, with connections to former Clinton associates. I asked for all records relating to communications between the State Department and Teneo and the State Department and any clients or entities represented by Teneo.
The State Department was slow to respond on all aspects of my letter and never provided any correspondence involving Teneo. I was told that my status as a ranking member at the time was a barrier to a response. When I became a chairman, I reiterated my interest in a response. So far, the State Department has put me off. The news that Secretary Clinton never had a government email address underscores why my inquiry matters. If top State Department officials are conducting government business on private email, the content might never see the light of day. A measure of accountability and transparency is lost. The State Department should fulfill my request from June 2013.
The public’s business ought to be public with few exceptions. When employees are allowed to serve the government and the private sector at the same time and use private email to do it, the employees have access to everything and the public, nothing. The public is in the dark. Government agencies need to answer for any blurring of the lines between public and private service and any concealing of the blurred lines through private email. That’s true regardless of party affiliation. Transparency and accountability are non-partisan principles.