Providing for Consideration of H.R. 2102, Free Flow of Information Act of 2007

Floor Speech

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2102, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION ACT OF 2007 -- (House of Representatives - October 16, 2007)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WELCH of Vermont. I thank the distinguished Chair and the good work of my friend from Florida.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of Resolution 742, the rule providing for the consideration of H.R. 2102, the Free Flow of Information Act.

This important legislation protects the public's right to know while at the same time honoring the public interest in having reporters testify in certain circumstances. While news organizations prefer to have their sources on the record whenever that is possible, we all know there are times when sources will simply not come forward without the promise of confidentiality, and that's in the public interest to get the information those sources have. Consider groundbreaking stories such as conditions at Walter Reed, Abu Ghraib, the Enron scandal, steroid abuse in the Major Leagues would not have been known to the public or the Congress without confidential sources. And over the past few years, more than 40 reporters and media organizations have been subpoenaed or questioned about their confidential sources, their notes, and their work product in criminal and civil cases in Federal court.

The need for this legislation was underscored when on August 13 a Federal judge ordered five more reporters from major news organizations to reveal their confidential sources in the privacy lawsuit filed by Dr. Steven Hatfill against the Federal Government.

If sources, including public and private sector whistleblowers, are uncertain whether reporters have adequate protection, they won't come forward in the public dialogue and important issues will diminish.

The shield is qualified, as it must be. If the information possessed by the journalist is necessary to prevent an act of terrorism, imminent death or significant bodily injury, or harm to national security, disclosure can be compelled.

While 49 States and the District of Columbia recognize a reporter's privilege through statute or common law, no uniform Federal standard exists to govern when testimony can be sought from reporters. Journalists should be the last resort, not the first stop, for civil litigants and prosecutors attempting to obtain the identity of confidential sources.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H. Res. 742 and ``yes'' on the underlying bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source