拥有5000万美元合同的联邦供应商导致门户网站瘫痪一个月
Federal vendor with $50M in contracts leaves portal broken for a month

原始链接: https://www.propublica.org/article/foia-requests-responses

自2025年初以来,美国人事管理局(OPM)的信息自由法案(FOIA)处理流程陷入瘫痪,这主要是由于特朗普第二届政府与政府效率部推行的大规模裁员所致。随着全美政府机构中超过600名信息专员被解雇或辞职,人事管理局的积压请求激增了七倍,处理时间也翻了一番。 作为一名追踪联邦任命官员的研究人员,作者描述了其在获取公共记录时经历的卡夫卡式困境。处理流程已从简单的电子邮件往来,转变为由Opexus管理的、功能失调的外包网络门户,而该承包商近期正卷入数据安全丑闻。如今,信息请求经常遭遇邮件被退回、门户网站无响应以及自动化的推诿。即使作者成功绕过这些故障,技术失灵和人手短缺也导致其请求陷入停滞。这种监管基础设施的恶化标志着政府透明度的显著倒退,因为各机构在履行对公众的法定职责方面正变得越来越吃力,甚至选择拒绝履行。

最近的一场 Hacker News 讨论揭示了美国联邦政府技术采购中存在的系统性失灵。此次讨论由一份报告引发:某政府供应商在持有 5000 万美元合同的情况下,竟让一个关键门户网站陷入瘫痪长达一个月之久。 评论者认为,这一问题并非党派之争,而是结构性顽疾。采购流程经常受到以下因素的阻碍: * **官僚主义复杂化:** 过度具体的需求往往倾向于既有供应商,或者在编写时就排除了其他竞争者,确保只有特定公司能够达标。 * **专业能力匮乏:** 政府官员往往缺乏制定有效合同所需的技术素养,导致不得不依赖大型“咨询集团”,使得政府与实际工作脱节。 * **监管臃肿:** 旨在“修复”系统的尝试往往只会增加层层监管,不仅无法解决根本问题,反而阻碍了效率。 * **系统性管理不善:** 批评者以“联邦信息自由法(FOIA)门户网站”等倡议为例指出,旨在简化流程的集中化举措,在实践中反而导致了严重积压并延长了处理时间。 尽管一些参与者建议利用人工智能和第一性原理等“局外人”方法来简化政府工作流程,但大多数人认为,当前的合同制度形成了一个难以打破的无能循环。
相关文章

原文

I file a lot of Freedom of Information Act requests. I’ve been requesting staff lists from both Trump administrations, and I have tracked thousands of federal political appointees in order to publish financial disclosures in searchable databases

Much of that data was sourced from the Office of Personnel Management, which maintains a trove of information about who works in the federal government. But that agency’s FOIA department was thrown into chaos as Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency fanned out across federal agencies to cut employees in early 2025.

Getting records from the agency has since become an increasingly Kafkaesque process, one that in early July of this year bounced me between three different seemingly abandoned email inboxes and two web portals. Aside from the fact that my once-routine requests now languish for months, just asking for documents has become its own kind of shell game.

“They just let the whole Privacy team go,” a now-former FOIA specialist at OPM told me by email in February 2025, referring to public records office staff. The specialist was cut the next day.

Here’s how the process worked at most agencies before the Trump administration and DOGE destroyed the offices that managed these requests: You would send a simple email with a text description of the documents you want. That’s it. 

It didn’t mean you would get the records in the most timely manner, or would get the records you wanted at all. But it was a simple process, and it often worked. 

According to OPM data, more than 600 government information specialists (staffers who administer FOIA and the Privacy Act) have resigned or been fired since the start of the second Trump administration. Within OPM itself, 12 information specialists left, seven of whom were laid off. (There was one new hire in that time period.) 

Reached by phone, the former FOIA specialist told me the cuts made the office less efficient, less able to perform its function and threatened the statutory laws they are required to fulfill. 

At the end of the 2025 fiscal year, over 1,600 FOIA requests were still in OPM’s backlog, seven times more than at the end of fiscal year 2024. The average processing time for a simple request at the agency slipped to over 84 days — twice as long as the year before.

Indeed, I noticed my records requests were taking longer, and they were increasingly steered toward web portals. Such was the case in early July, when I attempted to submit a request to OPM for human resources data. When I clicked “log in,” I was confronted with a message reading, “Something went wrong while processing your action. Please contact [email protected] for assistance if the problem persists.”

I emailed the address, but the message bounced back to me. AINS, it turned out, was no longer the name of the company — it is now known as Opexus. Opexus has received more than $50 million in federal contracts, according to a Bloomberg report, and has come under fire for lax cybersecurity standards after two of its employees were indicted for deleting and compromising government data. (One pleaded guilty in April, and the other was convicted in May). On its website, Opexus claims to process FOIA requests for 80% of federal institutions.

OPM’s website still listed contact information for a FOIA public liaison, someone who is supposed to help the public understand the records process and assist with requests. When I emailed the address, I got an automated response reading, “I am no longer at OPM. If you need assistance with a FOIA matter, please contact [email protected].”

So I did. I immediately got another automated message. This one told me to submit my request to the National FOIA Portal, a cross-government site that allows you to submit a FOIA request to any agency. 

So I did that, too. Afterward, I finally got a response that acknowledged my request — from the same OPM portal that was throwing an error any time I tried to use it.

Stymied by the lack of response from the agency itself, I reached out to Opexus support, explaining that I was a FOIA requester and that the OPM site wasn’t working. I got a response from someone named Stephen, saying, “I have escalated this issue to our engineering team.” When I followed up a few days later, Stephen said, “I have identified the root cause of the issue and am currently working with the OPM administrator to implement the necessary fix.” Further questions on the support ticket thread weren’t answered.

On July 23, 13 days after I had filed the support ticket with Opexus, I got another response asking me again what error I was getting. I told them I was still getting the same message. A few hours later, I tried logging back in. The site was fixed.

In a statement, Opexus said it became aware of the issue on July 10 when a customer support case was opened. Incidentally, that was the day I had opened one. The statement noted access to the portal was restored on July 23, and that the issue did not prevent OPM from receiving FOIA requests through alternate submission methods. The company said that “there is no evidence that customer data was accessed, lost, or compromised” and that the issue was isolated to OPM’s portal. 

The statement added that Opexus recognizes “how important uninterrupted access to FOIA request systems is for the public.”

OPM did not respond to a request for comment.

I’m still waiting for the records.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com