Recent news concerning Hillary Clinton's security challenged email server inspired me to think and research deeper about policies having to do with the manner the federal government operates. US Postal mail between government agencies is regulated in such a manner that all classified or sensitive communications must be routed through the office of a security administrator. The administrator determines the disposition of any such communications and reviews any regulatory requirements before stamping, copying and filing it with an appropriate security classification prior to sending the communication to its intended recipient. Presumably for a high official who is secretary of state, any form of communication to and from individuals or organizations affiliated or not with government operation would also need to pass through such a system. Can a government really function, and by that I mean, communicate critical legal governmental directives effectively and efficiently in this fashion without hampering every governmental function it touches? Who exactly gets to decide which communications of any nature are official business and which are not? If a lawyer can so easily run afoul of such a system, what chance do other elected officials have of not getting caught in the same snare? Mark my words; if Clinton loses the nomination over this, you haven't seen the last politician go down from a similar or even worse indiscretion. Or have I missed something?
The statute cited by the Washington Post editorial this morning clarified the scandal somewhat, but even that law is fuzzy in terms of the disposition of written correspondence in the moment it is written, and deals chiefly with classified documents which have already passed the desk of the aforementioned security officer. If any such documents were saved in an unsecured private server, that would be a problem except for the fact that in recent history, so many of the secured ones have been broken into. Too strictly enforced, this law could also be interpreted as a blanket gag order on communications from officials and civil servants of all federal agencies. I for one don't believe this is a great idea in terms of the way a government should operate. It is the diametric opposite of transparency.
Even the Washington Post has now backed off criticism of Clinton's handling of emails. A consultant on document security has said that although violations of the letter of the law on handling of classified materials are widespread due essentially to the argument about communication inefficiency I made in the OP, such was not the case here.
