Boast requires explanation

28 Jan 2010 // Boast requires explanation

The statement

"For the first time in history, my administration posts our White House visitors online."

President Barack Obama, in the State of the Union speech Wednesday

The ruling

It's true the Obama administration is releasing more information on White House visitors than any previous administration and posting those details to the Web. But the story is more complicated than that. When Obama first took office, the administration did not immediately release information on visitors, and it refused records requests from the news Web site msnbc.com and the advocacy organization Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. CREW filed suit for the records in July 2009, and by September, the White House announced its intention to release some of the logs in a settlement with CREW. Starting Sept. 15, the White House said it would release records of all visitors, but the records would be released 90 to 120 days after the visits occurred. And the administration outlined a series of exceptions for records that would not be released, including those related to a "small group of particularly sensitive meetings (e.g., visits of potential Supreme Court nominees)." It's a point that stuck out to us. That seems like a standard that can encompass an awful lot. "The problem with these exemptions is that they're just exemptions that (the White House is) making up," said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch. So far, the White House has released one month of visitor logs. An Obama administration spokesman said it has not withheld any records for political sensitivity, though a few are still being processed. So Obama's right that the release was unprecedented, but there is still a gap for roughly the first nine months Obama was in office. And the administration has given itself a significant loophole with the exemption for sensitivity. We find his claim Mostly True. Angie Drobnic Holan, Times staff writer

We found at least four of them

The statement

We've excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs.

President Barack Obama, in the State of the Union speech Wednesday

The ruling

He's right that on his first day in office he signed an executive order to bar lobbyists from his administration. But the order also included a loophole — a "waiver" clause that allows former lobbyists to serve. Waivers are granted by the administration itself, so they are little more than the administration saying it's okay for the lobbyist to work for the administration. Another provision allows lobbyists to serve if they agree to recuse themselves from discussions related to their former jobs. One of the first Obama appointees to get a waiver was William J. Lynn to be deputy secretary of defense. Lynn was a Raytheon lobbyist for six years. Jocelyn Frye, director of policy and projects in the Office of the First Lady, also got a waiver. Previously, Frye lobbied for the National Partnership for Women and Families. And Cecilia Muñoz, director of intergovernmental affairs in the Executive Office of the President, formerly lobbied for National Council of La Raza. The White House has issued seven waivers to its ethics rules, which apply to lobbyists as well as to people who served as officers and directors of a company or organization. And agencies have issued 15. The White House has said these waivers are less than 1 percent of the thousands of appointments that have been made. What about those recusals? The administration has not made public how many of these have been issued. We do know Mark Patterson, chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, took one. He worked as a lobbyist for Goldman Sachs. So Obama said he has "excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs." But that's not the case. We know of at least four that have taken on policymaking roles in his administration. We give Obama a False. Catharine Richert, Times staff writer