Administrative Secrecy
A Congressional Dilemma
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 3193151 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Francis E Rourke (Johns Hopkins University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1960 |
| Volume | 54 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 684-694 |
| Publication date | 1960-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | American Political Science Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0003-0554 • E-ISSN: 1537-5943 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/1953946 |
| OpenAlex | W4254694407 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 6 |
| References cited | 4 |
Attacks upon administrative secrecy are a commonplace of congressional politics. By resolution, investigation, and the threat of even more punitive sanctions, Congress has repeatedly asserted its belief that executive officials should not be allowed to withhold documents and testimony at their own discretion. The most graphic recent evidence of this legislative concern has been provided by a House Special Subcommittee on Government Information. Over the past three years, this group, headed by Representative Moss of California, has made far-ranging efforts to expose and dramatize the evils of executive secrecy.The long-standing congressional resentment against administrative efforts to conceal information has very visible roots in considerations of institutional self-interest, since the performance of legislative functions in central areas of policy-making and administrative oversight demands frequent access to facts that only executive officials can supply. In the field of defense policy, especially, congressional dependence upon executive information is acute, and bitter controversy has been sparked by executive refusals to release data bearing on such matters as the missile program, foreign-aid expenditures, and differences within the high command over the best way to spend the defense dollar
Accountability · Dilemma · Discretion · Government (linguistics · Law and economics · Legislature · Political science · Politics · Punitive damages · Sanctions · Secrecy · Sociology · Intelligence, Security, War Strategy · Law · Law, Rights, and Freedoms · Public Administration
Administering Politics
Mandated state-level open government training programs
Internet information-seeking and its relation to support for access to government records
Congressional Response to Statements of Administration Policy and Presidential Signing Statements
The Gaither Committee and the Policy Process
Blockchain and digital governance
| Unique citing works | 6 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,09 |
| Citation span | 1961 - 2025 (65) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 6 |