In July, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), along with a bipartisan group of five other senators, announced sweeping legislation to declassify and release government information about unidentified flying objects.
The announcement coincided with, and seemed to corroborate, an extraordinary series of UFO-related developments. But now, Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio), Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) appear poised to quash this bipartisan transparency initiative.
In the absence of reasonable, good-faith objections to the core provisions of the historic legislation, the question is why.
If there is nothing to hide and nothing to the UFO phenomenon, why would any member of Congress object to greater transparency and oversight of an executive branch prone to excessive and dangerous over-classification?
Or perhaps there is something to hide. According to Schumer, a sweeping investigation “led some in Congress to believe that the executive branch was concealing important information regarding [UFOs] over broad periods of time.”
This is corroborated by the inspector general of the intelligence community, who deemed a decorated whistleblower’s assertion that the government inappropriately concealed UFO-related information from Congress “credible and urgent.”
Moreover, as Senate Intelligence Vice Chair Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) noted in extraordinary detail, several high-level officials with top security clearances have told congressional investigators of the existence of surreptitious government UFO retrieval and “reverse engineering” programs. At the same time, 10 ex-government officials, military officers and scientists have alleged (or suggested) publicly that the U.S. government has recovered at least one UFO.
In light of these remarkable developments, the overarching objectives of the Schumer-led Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena Disclosure Act (UAPDA) are government transparency and the restoration of constitutionally-mandated congressional oversight.
At its core, the UAPDA establishes that all government UFO records “carry a presumption of immediate disclosure.” Any records deemed too sensitive for immediate release would be subject to review by an independent nine-member panel. Following a recommendation from the panel, the president would decide whether, and when, to release any such documents or records.
Perhaps most importantly, the UAPDA’s “controlled disclosure campaign” would require a benchmark-driven plan for the eventual public release of all UFO-related records or information, no matter how sensitive.
Key Republicans appear to object to the UAPDA on two grounds: The possible leak of classified information, and the possibility that the review board would duplicate other government UFO efforts. Neither objection holds water.
First, the proposed records review board would be composed of “distinguished persons of high national professional reputation.” Each, along with board staff, would be required to hold top security clearances.
Second, the president would retain ultimate authority to release any record or information deemed too sensitive to release immediately. These safeguards make an inadvertent leak of classified information extremely unlikely.
More importantly, if key Republicans succeed in neutering or quashing the UAPDA in its entirety, they may inadvertently spur the leak of sensitive information that they ostensibly fear.
As Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.), a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, stated recently, new protections enacted by Congress resulted in “all sorts of [UFO whistleblowers] coming out of the woodwork.” These individuals, Gallagher said, are telling congressional investigators that “they’ve been part of this or that [UFO] program,” resulting in “a variety of pretty intense conversations.” Moreover, according to Sen. Rubio, “a lot of people… are starting to edge towards coming forward and we hear may be coming forward.”
Without the UAPDA’s formal, controlled disclosure framework, frustrated whistleblowers may feel compelled to leak sensitive UFO-related information, potentially resulting in a “catastrophic” or “uncontrolled” disclosure.
Separately, Republicans appear to object to the UAPDA on the grounds that the proposed review board would be duplicative of the government’s new UFO analysis office.
For one, the office analyzes video and other data of UFO incidents reported by U.S. servicemembers. Such work is categorically different from the transparency-focused mission of the UAPDA-proposed review board.
More importantly, as former deputy assistant secretary of defense for intelligence Christopher Mellon aptly noted, asking the government’s UFO office to investigate allegations of illegality by the executive branch is akin to tasking intelligence agencies with investigating the Iran-Contra scandal. An independent body with presidential imprimatur is far better suited to the task of enforcing transparency, especially if an agency refuses to release relevant records.
Moreover, any costs associated with the UAPDA’s nine-member review board would be minimal in the context of the entire defense budget.
Ultimately, the dearth of sound objections to the bipartisan UAPDA raises several questions about the motivations of the Republicans now seeking to halt the legislation.
Some of the most forceful opposition to the UAPDA appears to come from Turner, chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Of note, Turner represents the congressional district that includes Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, which features prominently — and infamously — in UFO history.
As physicist and hedge fund director Eric Weinstein noted, if members of Congress were to make a hypothetical “last ditch effort to scuttle” the disclosure of secret government UFO programs, he would have guessed that a congressman from Turner’s district would be involved.
Moreover, with Republicans generally distrustful of government and seemingly natural ideological allies of any efforts to expose undue government secrecy, GOP opposition to the UAPDA is particularly perplexing.
But thanks largely to social media, citizen advocacy and engagement is surging. Polished, nuanced guides to engaging Congress on the Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena Disclosure Act and calls to action have garnered millions of engagements.
Rightfully so. With government secrecy potentially concealing the biggest story in human history, Americans of all political stripes should be vocal advocates for government accountability and transparency.
Marik von Rennenkampff served as an analyst with the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation and was an Obama administration appointee at the U.S. Department of Defense.