Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Is it all right with you if government officials conduct official government business using public (non-intranet, non-government, .com) internet tools such as Yahoo or Hotmail?
Is it all right with you if government officials conduct official government business using public (non-intranet, non-government, .com) internet tools such as Yahoo or Hotmail?
Is this your first day in the US? They've been doing it for more than 20 years.
As with everything, there is no black and white answer.
Some questions:
Is the information classified?
Is the information readily available to those that would ask for it?
Is the information kept in accordance with standards set by the state/federal/local governments?
I know what you're trying to do. It's just not that simple. When you pledge to open up government and create transparency that will eliminate scandals, then use a service like Yahoo (or email@gwb43.org) to hide what you're really doing, then no, it shouldn't be allowed. You should be called on that ****e really quick once it's discovered.
As with everything, there is no black and white answer.
Some questions:
Is the information classified?
Is the information readily available to those that would ask for it?
Is the information kept in accordance with standards set by the state/federal/local governments?
I know what you're trying to do. It's just not that simple. When you pledge to open up government and create transparency that will eliminate scandals, then use a service like Yahoo (or email@gwb43.org) to hide what you're really doing, then no, it shouldn't be allowed. You should be called on that ****e really quick once it's discovered.
It is that simple, though. "All due respeck" but none of your checklist should matter, if it's official business. And I'm not an intranet-installer defending the brotherhood, either
Most governmental agencies have security policies which prohibit employees/staffers from using the internet to conduct official business. Had Gov. Palin adhered to this policy, she probably could have avoided this situation.
That the Internet and email are used for official business is not at question, this has been accepted practice for many years.
The question is really this: Should official government business be conducted on PRIVATE email and internet accounts. The answer is no, it shouldn't be, and if it is, then it becomes de facto government official communications.
Before I retired from the Army in 2003 (civilian employee), they had me load CITRIX brand software on MY personal home computer, over a commercial internet line (Cox, Inc) that was paid for by ME. The CITRIX software and passwords validated that it really was ME on that line as I logged into the Army INTRANET to do official Army business while at home. Everything I did from home was OFFICIAL communications, and was not something "personal" that I could claim as off limits to scrutiny.
The laws of our land have long supported government email and networks as "official systems of record" that are FULLY equal to printed/signed letters and documents. The same holds true for corporate email and nets. These are simply modern means of communications and conducting business, in place of smoke signals, telegraphs, letters and other documents.
The bottom line is that ANY time ANY one conducts their employers business, over ANY network, then that SHOULD be legally viewed as official government communication and subject to inclusion in the public record - and in the press. The non-government emails and networks should NOT be used for official business, but if they are, then that business rightfully becomes part of the PUBLIC record. Using private means is a prima facie indication that someone has something they want to hide from scrutiny, and red flags and alarms should be going up to catch it.
Whether or not it's done isn't the issue. The fact that Palin conducts business using emails and then wants to keep them private is. (Just like the fact that she welcomed scrutiny into Troopergate and now is blocking the investigation, but that's a different topic.) Isn't anyone worried about having another secretive administration? Don't these people work for us?
I was typing, but had I first read Mike's post (above mine) I probably wouldn't have commented. Good post!
Now that I am editing, I might as well add something that was on my mind. When I hear people complaining that it is a violation of privacy for their bosses to read their emails, I have the same reaction. When I'm home on my own personal computer, it is entirely different than using a company computer on company time. In this case, the American people are the employers. Unfortunately, the people who are now in Washington forget the word "elected" in elected officials.
I have used a personal email account for business communications while traveling on business. It was an easy way to make documents available while traveling. Most business email accounts are difficult or impossible to log on from a remote location, due to security concerns. Of course, the data I emailed wasn't a security issue, but from the sounds of it, neither were Palin's emails.
I have used a personal email account for business communications while traveling on business. It was an easy way to make documents available while traveling. Most business email accounts are difficult or impossible to log on from a remote location, due to security concerns. Of course, the data I emailed wasn't a security issue, but from the sounds of it, neither were Palin's emails.
(a) I use email for business too. We are not running for Vice President of our country.
(b) It's funny that the Patriot Act gave the government the right to ask my library what I read, tap my phone calls and read my emails even if I've committed no crime. Yet when a public official is possibly using her private email to conduct government business, it's considered to be "private."
She hasn't even gotten into the White House yet (and hopefully never will) and she's already hiding so many things. An investigation that she previously welcomed with open arms is now being covered up and her husband won't testify. Even if I were a McCain/Palin supporter, this would disturb me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
