![]() ![]() Yet, one was a low-level Defense Department accounting technician and the other was a grocery clerk on a military base. ![]() The American Federation of Government Employees has fought for two workers who, in the name of national security, were denied employment protections available to other civil servants. That footnote amounts to a loophole for agencies to place a classification level on employees who do not come close to classified information. A footnote in the OMB report says they might have a “potential need for immediate access to classified information, but may not have access until the need arises.” The cuts should start with the 2 million people who have security clearances but do not have access to classified information. OMB says this would “minimize risk of access to sensitive information and reduce cost.” The Pentagon’s independent review of the September’s Washington Navy Yard shooting says: “As a starting point, DoD should seek to make a 10 percent cut in the number of positions that require access to material classified as Secret.” Reports released this week by OMB and the Defense Department call for cutting the number of security clearance holders. For others, losing a clearance could really hurt their careers. Some people might be happy to get rid of a clearance they don’t need and the baggage that comes with it. But on the individual level, it will vary. Overall, cutting the number of clearances is probably a good thing. Hopefully, we can now achieve bipartisan support” for the kind of reforms he proposed in pending legislation. Lynch (Mass.), the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform federal workforce subcommittee, said the reports “again highlight the significant lapses in our security clearance framework. . . There is general bipartisan congressional support for security clearance reform, if not agreement on the details. Reducing the number of people with security clearances and implementing other measures seems likely now. ![]() Tom Coburn (Okla.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. because we tend to over-classify information in our government,” said Sen. “We have to acknowledge the fact that too many people have security clearances. 11, 2001, climate has led to a continuing increase in security measures, sometimes excessive. “Still, the number of clearance-eligible personnel is considerable, exceeding 5.1 million including civilian and military employees and contractors in Fiscal Year 2013.”ĭespite the policy, agencies have had little incentive to limit the number of security clearances. “Executive branch-wide policy directs agencies to minimize the number of employees and contractors with eligibility for access to classified information to the minimum required to conduct agency functions,” said the report, known as the Suitability and Security Processes Review. That means about 2 million people hold, or are eligible to hold, security clearances but apparently do not need them. If that sounds like a lot, it is, especially when only 60 percent of them have access to classified information, according to a report submitted to President Obama this week by the Office of Management and Budget and other agencies. No one argues that more than 5 million people with security clearances is too few. There’s broad agreement that Uncle Sam needs to tighten up the way he allows federal employees, military personnel and contractors to have access to government secrets.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |