3 ms·

The language exempts everything pertaining to this act. If there's intel informing a ban, that's one thing. But everything, even unclassified information? That'

The language exempts everything pertaining to this act. If there's intel informing a ban, that's one thing. But everything, even unclassified information? That's too much.

gruez 4y ago
It literally does not. As per your own quote > Any information submitted to the Federal Government by a party to a covered transaction in accordance with this Act, as well as any information the Federal Government may create relating to the review of the covered transaction That's certainly not "everything pertaining to this act".
- henriquez 4y ago
  If it’s not classified it shouldn’t be exempt from FOIA, period. The government works for us, not the other way around.
  - gruez 4y ago
    >The government works for us, not the other way around. Part of "government works for us" involves not having them give up information in response to FOIA requests. I want the government to work for me by not allowing my tax returns to be disclosed via FOIA, for instance.
    - henriquez 4y ago
      Fake and dumb example. That’s already excluded under existing law and you’re a pedantic troll for suggesting that was what I meant.
      - gruez 4y ago
        >That’s already excluded under existing law and you’re a pedantic troll for suggesting that was what I meant. And this new law exempts other information. What's the issue here?
        eganist 4y ago
        The issue is that you're not debating this topic in good faith. This act exempts all information relevant to the act from disclosure, and unlike taxes of individuals, everything that this act would be concerned with is a potential risk to both security and individual liberties of every person in the United States as well as many people abroad. "Any information" submitted that's relevant to the law ("by a party to a covered transaction in accordance with this Act") is exempted from disclosure. The law's purpose is to enable regulation of covered entities and their covered transactions; that's what determines what's relevant to the law. Likewise, "Any information" generated by the government as required by the law is exempted from disclosure. This would mean not only is any submission to the federal government in accordance with the act excluded from FOIA, literally everything the government does in regards to the act, including creating procedures, refining and operating those procedures, and even matters such as OIG reviews of procedures, would be blocked from disclosure. Which renders true the point I made earlier ("The language exempts everything pertaining to this act") which you so glibly dismissed. --- I'm not reading replies to this thread, so feel free to get in a last word.

The language exempts everything pertaining to this act. If there's intel informing a ban, that's one thing. But everything, even unclassified information? That's too much.

gruez 4y ago

It literally does not. As per your own quote > Any information submitted to the Federal Government by a party to a covered transaction in accordance with this Act, as well as any information the Federal Government may create relating to the review of the covered transaction That's certainly not "everything pertaining to this act".

henriquez 4y ago
If it’s not classified it shouldn’t be exempt from FOIA, period. The government works for us, not the other way around.
- gruez 4y ago
  >The government works for us, not the other way around. Part of "government works for us" involves not having them give up information in response to FOIA requests. I want the government to work for me by not allowing my tax returns to be disclosed via FOIA, for instance.
  - henriquez 4y ago
    Fake and dumb example. That’s already excluded under existing law and you’re a pedantic troll for suggesting that was what I meant.
    - gruez 4y ago
      >That’s already excluded under existing law and you’re a pedantic troll for suggesting that was what I meant. And this new law exempts other information. What's the issue here?
      - eganist 4y ago
        The issue is that you're not debating this topic in good faith. This act exempts all information relevant to the act from disclosure, and unlike taxes of individuals, everything that this act would be concerned with is a potential risk to both security and individual liberties of every person in the United States as well as many people abroad. "Any information" submitted that's relevant to the law ("by a party to a covered transaction in accordance with this Act") is exempted from disclosure. The law's purpose is to enable regulation of covered entities and their covered transactions; that's what determines what's relevant to the law. Likewise, "Any information" generated by the government as required by the law is exempted from disclosure. This would mean not only is any submission to the federal government in accordance with the act excluded from FOIA, literally everything the government does in regards to the act, including creating procedures, refining and operating those procedures, and even matters such as OIG reviews of procedures, would be blocked from disclosure. Which renders true the point I made earlier ("The language exempts everything pertaining to this act") which you so glibly dismissed. --- I'm not reading replies to this thread, so feel free to get in a last word.