 |
Font Size  
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Monday, August 24th, 2009 at 11:11 am by Duane Blackburn
What does an Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) employee do? It’s an often asked question that’s difficult to answer since the range of things we do here is rather broad. So, in the name of open government and 21st Century communication, we’ve decided to have some OSTP staffers periodically blog about their work. I’m Duane Blackburn and I work in the homeland and national security arena—and I’ve agreed to inaugurate this effort.
One of my newest projects had its genesis about a month into the new Administration, when the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) released a report entitled “Strengthening Forensic Sciences in the United States: A Path Forward.” That report suggested several ways to improve forensic science and its application in criminal justice and other arenas. OSTP received a briefing on the findings just prior to the report’s release and tasked me, because of my experience coordinating interagency activities while at OSTP and prior positions at the Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Institute of Justice, with studying the issue and crafting a strategy for addressing the challenges raised in the report.
I studied the report — as well as several similar reports from prior years — and met with numerous individuals and groups to obtain their guidance, including the Department of Justice, the National Institute for Standards and Technology, the Consortium of Forensic Science Organizations, and the Innocence Project. I concluded that with proper leadership the vast majority of the foundational needs raised in the NAS report could be addressed using existing authorities and relationships. Representatives of several Executive Branch agencies and offices, including OSTP, the National Science Foundation, and the Department of Justice decided to establish an interagency body within the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) to provide this leadership. Thus was born the NSTC Subcommittee on Forensic Science (the Subcommittee), whose charter is available online.
NSTC committees and subcommittees typically identify and prioritize science and technology needs across the federal enterprise, then coordinate interagency management and funding of research and related activities. Forensic science poses a conundrum, however, in that it is a field that is predominantly non-federal in nature, with some estimates suggesting that more than 95% of forensic activities are performed at the state/local levels. That means the Subcommittee will have to work in partnership with others if it is to be successful. Much of the Subcommittee’s early work has focused on the question of how to collaborate effectively with non-federal offices and organizations while staying true to federal laws such as the Federal Advisory Committee Act and related Federal policies.
With this posting, I’m asking for your thoughts: How can the Subcommittee best collaborate with state/local government entities and the private sector?
I look forward to your comments and suggestions and will provide regular updates on the Subcommittee’s work through this blog.
On the journey together,
Duane
Duane Blackburn is a career federal employee who has served as a policy analyst at OSTP since March of 2004.
Tags: forensic science, OSTP
Posted in Working at OSTP | 1 Comment »
Wednesday, August 12th, 2009 at 3:18 pm by
On August 11, OSTP hosted a meeting with FDA Principal Deputy Commissioner, Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, United States Chief Technology Officer, Aneesh Chopra, members of the White House Open Government Initiative, and the health care investor community at the White House to discuss ways FDA can make useful and understandable information available about the product approval process and how transparency at FDA can foster medical product innovation. Participants included individuals who invest in small, mid-size, and large companies that develop a range of products regulated by FDA. During the conversation, participants provided feedback to FDA and OSTP in three main areas: (1) how FDA can better explain its processes and operations, (2) what information would be helpful for FDA to provide to sponsors that submit product applications to the agency, and (3) how transparent processes at FDA can foster product development and innovation.
The comments shared during this meeting will be used to inform FDA’s work of developing the recommendations about how to improve transparency and open government at the agency. Those recommendations will be delivered to Dr. Margaret Hamburg, FDA Commissioner, in approximately five months.
Attendees
Transparency Meeting with Investors & FDA
August 11, 2009, 9:30 - 11:00am, EEOB 350
· Barry Eisenstein, Cubist
· Scott Minick, ARCH
· Jonathan Flemming, Oxbio
· John H. Griffin, Numerate, Inc.
· Mike Ross, SV Life Sciences
· Michael Doherty, Genentech
· Vern Norviel, WSGR
· Jonathan Fleming, Oxford Bioscience Partners
· William Rosenzweig, Physic Ventures
· Jonathan S. Leff, Warburg Pincus
· Kelly Slone, NVCA
· Justin Klein, NEA
Afia Asamoah is FDA Transparency Initiative Coordinator
Posted in News, OpenGov | Comments Off
Tuesday, August 11th, 2009 at 4:11 pm by
Over the past two weeks, during the public comment period on OMB’s cookie policy, we have received significant feedback and suggested revisions to the current policy. These comments reflect individual opinions on all sides of the issue.
Our main goal in revisiting the ban on using persistent cookies on Federal websites is to bring the federal government into the 21st century. Consistent with this Administration’s commitment to making government more open and participatory, we want federal agencies to be able to provide the same user- friendly, dynamic, and citizen-centric websites that people have grown accustomed to using when they shop or get news online or communicate through social media networks, while also protecting people’s privacy.
It is clear that protecting the privacy of citizens who visit government websites must be one of the top considerations in any new policy. This is why we’ve taken such a cautious approach going forward and why we felt it so important to get feedback and hear from people on this. While we wanted to get people’s ideas for improving our policy, we also needed to hear any concerns so that we could understand better where potential pitfalls might lie.
This privacy issue has recently received some attention in the media. We want to make it clear that the current policy on Federal agencies’ use of cookies has not changed. Moreover, the policy won’t change until we’ve read the public comments that have been submitted to ensure that we’re considering all sides of the issue and are addressing privacy concerns appropriately.
We would also like to take this opportunity to address a potential misperception. Some articles have hinted that the government is creating special exemptions for third-parties from existing privacy rules, with the result that there wouldn’t be adequate protection of people’s personal information. This is not true. The current policy in place on persistent cookies continues to apply to all Federal agencies and to those agencies’ use of third-party applications, whenever personal information is collected on the agency’s behalf.
Once again, we appreciate everyone’s contribution to this topic and are grateful for the time and energy devoted by those who provided such useful insight on this issue.
Michael Fitzpatrick is Associate Administrator, OMB Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Vivek Kundra is Federal CIO.
Posted in Cookie Policy | Comments Off
Friday, August 7th, 2009 at 6:00 pm by Robynn Sturm
The Department of Defense is reviewing its Web 2.0 guidance and wants your help. New technologies - such as Aristotle, DoDTechipedia/Defense Solutions, and TroopTube - promise to quickly deliver the best innovation to the military, reduce duplication by connecting experts, and connect military friends and families with their loved ones. At the same time, new technologies bring new vulnerabilities. On July 31st, 2009, the Department of Defense launched the Web 2.0 Guidance Forum to inform a responsible and effective use of emerging Internet-based capabilities. You can share your thoughts, experiences, research and links through Thursday, August 20th.
Also, don’t forget to weigh in on the Federal Web Sites Cookie Policy Forum. The Forum has already received 70 comments, providing valuable perspectives, and will wind to a close on Monday, August 10th.
Robynn Sturm is Assistant Deputy Chief Technology Officer
Posted in News, OpenGov | Comments Off
Friday, August 7th, 2009 at 3:25 pm by Michael Baldwin
Thanks to everyone for participating in the public consultation on open government. Phase I, “Brainstorm,” ran from May 21-28th and elicited 900+ ideas and 33,000 votes. Phase II, “Discussion,” ran from June 3-21 and attracted more than 1,000 comments in response to 16 topics. Phase III, “Drafting,” which lasted from June 22-July 6, resulted in 305 drafts by 375 authors, with 2,256 of you voting on those drafts. We are in the process of reviewing all these materials, as well as submissions we received via mail and email (posted online in “From the Inbox”) along with input from government employees in order to prepare our report and recommendations.
We invite you to help distill what we’ve learned. You can download the content from each of the three phases of public consultation here.
We will post further updates as the review process matures.
Michael Baldwin is an Office of Science & Technology Policy Student Volunteer
Posted in OpenGov | Comments Off
Friday, August 7th, 2009 at 12:00 pm by
Kudos to the FCC for finding innovative ways to engage the public in an on-going dialogue about a National Broadband Plan to bring broadband to all Americans. I attended yesterday’s opening workshop – the first of more than 20 such workshops at the FCC. If you weren’t there live, you could have watched it on the web or participated in Second Life. And if you missed it, you can join in the Open Government Broadband Brainstorm at http://fcc-opengov.ideascale.com/ where the FCC is seeking examples from you and your communities about how broadband is being used to achieve a host of national priorities.
The inaugural workshop was on open government and civic engagement. The FCC and the Administration want your ideas on innovative ways to use broadband to more effectively interact with the government on issues you care about. And if you have broadband examples you can share on education, energy, healthcare, or in areas not thought of before, the Broadband Brainstorm has a place to suggest broadband examples on all these topics. You can discuss the examples that are submitted and vote on the best ones which will then rise to the top. It should be fun to watch, participate, and learn as the brainstorm stays open and develops throughout the course of the workshops.
Scott Deutchman is Deputy Chief Technology Officer for Telecommunications
Posted in News, OpenGov | Comments Off
Thursday, August 6th, 2009 at 10:00 am by OSTP
The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, or PCAST, is an advisory group of the nation’s leading scientists and engineers, appointed by the President to augment the science and technology advice he receives from inside the White House and from cabinet departments and other federal agencies. PCAST offers insights, and in many cases makes policy recommendations, concerning the full range of issues where understandings from the domains of science, technology, and innovation are relevant to the policy choices before the President. PCAST is administered by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), which I direct in parallel with my role as science and technology advisor to the President.
As you can see from the member roster, PCAST is populated by a spectacular cast of leaders of the science and technology community. The 21 members include 4 winners of MacArthur “genius” awards, 3 Nobel laureates, 2 university presidents, as well as 16 members of one or more of the U.S. national academies of science, engineering, and medicine. At its meeting Thursday and Friday —the first meeting of the full Obama PCAST—the group will be hearing from a number of Administration officials who deal with science and technology issues. The first public session will start at 10:15 Thursday and the full agenda is visible online.
The largest part of the committee’s attention over the two days will be focused on the selection of the topics to which PCAST will be giving highest-priority attention in the months immediately ahead. The President will meet with PCAST on Friday to weigh in with his own thoughts on these priorities. (Everybody gets a say, but his say is the final one!) Candidate topics include the roles of science and technology in job creation, economic recovery, and growth; research and development strategy for clean-energy technologies; the science of adaptation to climate change; the science and technology of homeland security; extending internet connectivity to all Americans; and a strategy for strengthening science, technology, engineering, and math education in this country.
It’s a privilege and a pleasure to be working on these issues in an Administration led by a President so appreciative of the potential of science and technology to help meet the many challenges our country faces. I know all my colleagues in PCAST feel the same way. I hope you will gain something of an appreciation for the excitement and enthusiasm as well as the ideas we are bringing to this work as you watch the proceedings of this inaugural PCAST meeting—a meeting, by the way, that, through webcasting on the OSTP website embodies the President’s oft-stated commitment to using technology to make government more open, transparent, and collaborative.
John P. Holdren
Posted in News, OpenGov, PCAST | 13 Comments »
Monday, July 27th, 2009 at 11:30 am by Public Interest Declassification Forum
As members of the Public Interest Declassification Board, we would like to thank each of you who have participated in the Declassification Policy Forum over the last several weeks. We have received over 150 comments with specific, detailed recommendations for revisions to Executive Order 12958, as amended, “Classified National Security Information.”
Your recommendations were not only informative for us as members of the Public Interest Declassification Board, but we are certain they will inform the internal review of Executive Order 12958, as amended. To support this review process and to answer the request of the National Security Advisor, we have responded with a letter and a summary of your recommendations. While we have attempted to capture the key themes we saw in our letter, we have also provided a detailed summary of your comments.
The Declassification Policy Forum allowed us to have an extended three-week conversation with the people we strive to represent – the public. The use of a blog, as a new media tool to facilitate public participation, provided everyone the benefit of seeing the ongoing conversation when they formulated their comments. We have seen how effective the tool was at elevating the level of discussion around the topics of classification and declassification policy. We will look to use online tools to enhance our conversation with the public in the future, but we also hope this experiment will give inspiration to other areas of policy that stand to greatly benefit from harnessing the collective wisdom and insight of the public.
Our democracy depends on both an engaged and informed citizenry. Citizens’ access to information about the Government is essential to their informed decisions and their ability to hold elected officials accountable. Classification and declassification policy directly impacts citizens’ access to Government information. We believe this policy has been strengthened by the enthusiastic and substantive public participation in the Declassification Policy Forum. We thank you for participation in this important policy area and look forward to working with you in the future.
The Public Interest Declassification Board
Posted in Declassification | Comments Off
Friday, July 24th, 2009 at 9:56 am by
Posted by Michael Fitzpatrick and Vivek Kundra
During the Open Government Initiative outreach, Federal employees and the public have asked us questions about the federal government’s policy on cookies. As part of our effort to create a more open and innovative government, we’re working on a new cookie policy that we’ll want your input on. But before we get into that, let’s provide some context.
In June 2000, the OMB Director issued a memorandum (M-00-13, later updated by M-03-22)) that prohibited Federal agencies from using certain web-tracking technologies, primarily persistent cookies, due to privacy concerns, unless the agency head approved of these technologies because of a compelling need. That was more than nine years ago. In the ensuing time, cookies have become a staple of most commercial websites with widespread public acceptance of their use. For example, every time you use a “shopping cart” at an online store, or have a website remember customized settings and preferences, cookies are being used.
This past June, we blogged about ways to enhance citizen participation in government through basic policy changes, including revisions to the current policy on web-tracking technologies. We heard a lot of informal comments on that blog, so we decided to pursue the more formal comment route through the Federal Register. The goal of this review is to develop a new policy that allows the Federal Government to continue to protect the privacy of people who visit Federal websites while, at the same time, making these websites more user-friendly, providing better customer service, and allowing for enhanced web analytics.
Under the framework we’re looking at, any Federal agency using web tracking technologies on a Federal Government website would be subject to basic principles governing the use of such technologies and would be required to:
- Adhere to all existing laws and policies (including those designed to protect privacy) governing the collection, use, retention, and safeguarding of any data gathered from users;
- Post clear and conspicuous notice on the website of the use of web tracking technologies;
- Provide a clear and understandable means for a user to opt-out of being tracked; and
- Not discriminate against those users who decide to opt-out, in terms of their access to information.
OMB is considering a three-tiered approach to the use of web tracking technologies on Federal Government websites:
- 1st - Single-session technologies, which track users over a single session and do not maintain tracking data over multiple sessions or visits;
- 2nd - Multi-session technologies for use in analytics, which track users over multiple sessions purely to gather data to analyze web traffic statistics; and
- 3rd - Multi-session technologies for use as persistent identifiers, which track users over multiple visits with the intent of remembering data, settings, or preferences unique to that visitor for purposes beyond what is needed for web analytics.
We expect that there would be more stringent restrictions or review of the technologies within the tiers that might have higher privacy risks.
To share your comments on this approach, you can post a comment here, submit comments directly in response to the Federal Register notice mentioned above, or email them to: oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. Comments submitted by August 10, 2009 in one of these three ways, will be taken into consideration though we strongly encourage you to comment here so that others can respond. Comments submitted via email will also be republished here. We’re hoping to hear your thoughts on:
- The basic principles governing the use of such technologies;
- The appropriate tiers;
- The acceptable use and restrictions of each tier;
- The degree of clear and conspicuous notice on each website that web tracking technologies are being used;
- The applicability and scope of such a framework on Federal agency use of third-party applications or websites;
- The choice between an opt-in versus opt-out approach for users;
- Unintended or non-obvious privacy implications; and
- Any other general comments with respect to this issue.
We appreciate the feedback that we’ve received already, and we look forward to hearing more.
Michael Fitzpatrick is Associate Administrator, OMB Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
Vivek Kundra is Federal CIO
Posted in Cookie Policy, OpenGov | 87 Comments »
Tuesday, July 14th, 2009 at 4:30 pm by Public Interest Declassification Forum
The Declassification Policy Forum has been an unprecedented opportunity for the public to provide recommendations for revisions to Executive Order 12958, as amended, “Classified National Security Information.” We welcome your comments on all four topics (Declassification Policy, Creating a National Declassification Center, Classification Policy, and Technology Challenges and Opportunities) until Sunday, July 19, 2009. The Public Interest Declassification Board will use your comments in formulating their recommendations to the National Security Advisor the week of July 20, 2009. This letter will be made available on the Declassification Policy Forum.
Admittedly, the topic of Technology Challenges and Opportunities was our most ambitious topic for the Declassification Policy Forum. We acknowledge that participation in this topic is greatly enhanced with an understanding of the challenges of electronic records within the context of the current classification and declassification systems. We are glad to see 15 thoughtful comments on this topic. It is clear that this should be the beginning of an ongoing discussion if we are to leverage the full potential of the electronic environment, while mitigating the challenges. Here are a few of your recommendations:
- Declassifiers should embrace technology, the reviewing of electronic records, and all of the challenges posed by the electronic environment.
- Declassifiers should be able to communicate on a classified network. There should be a Facebook for declassifiers so referrals can be easily mitigated.
- A National Declassification Center should be designed for the work of electronic records.
- A National Declassification Center and the National Archives should encourage the transfer of electronic records from agencies.
- The Government should leverage the Enterprise Content Management (ECM) environment, which could address many challenges, including management of the entire lifecycle of information.
- Electronic records management must be a priority, otherwise historically significant records will be lost.
- Content should be the basis for evaluation of whether the electronic record is historically significant, not the format.
- Delaying the declassification of electronic records (and therefore public access) for an unspecified length of time because of format is unacceptable.
- The sharing of information can be greatly enhanced with an “underground web layer” to the Internet that would use Internet protocols that can only be read by those who have legitimate authority to access information.
Public Interest Declassification Board Support Staff
Posted in Declassification | Comments Off
|
|
|
 |
"plus" sign by the author's name.
"minus" sign by the author's name. Comments with a low score will collapse behind a link. Comments with a high score will be fully visible on the page.
"flag" to the right of the author's name. We will review flagged comments and restore those that have been inappropriately flagged, and publish the rest on the 
