( CNN ) -- At the end of July , the Senate intelligence committee marked up legislation drafted in response to recent high-profile leaks of classified information . The committee 's chairwoman , Dianne Feinstein , claims that the bill will address the `` culture of leaks '' in Washington . But the leaks are a symptom of the intelligence community 's culture of secrecy -- and the bill would make that problem worse in a host of ways . Any insider will tell you that the government classifies far too much information . Top military and national security officials estimate that between 50 % and 90 % of classified documents could safely be released . That adds up to a massive amount of unnecessary secrecy when one considers there were 92 million decisions to classify information in 2011 alone . The WikiLeaks disclosures featured some vivid examples , such as a cable from an American diplomat who classified his description of a typical wedding in the province of Dagestan . The impetus for the current Senate bill -- a series of leaks of classified information that may have been implicitly or explicitly `` authorized '' by top administration officials -- illustrates the problem . High-level intelligence officials are not enemies of the state . If they are approving the disclosure of classified information , it 's a pretty safe bet the material did n't require classifying in the first place . News : Senate moves to crack down on national security leaks . Take the fact that President Obama is personally involved in identifying the targets of drone strikes , as reported by The New York Times , one of the disclosures that prompted congressional action . It is virtually impossible to fantasize a scenario in which this information could be used to harm the United States . Overclassification contributes directly to leaks that threaten national security . As Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart commented in 1971 , `` when everything is classified , then nothing is classified , and the system becomes one to be disregarded by the cynical or the careless , and to be manipulated by those intent on self-protection or self-promotion . '' Put simply , officials who routinely see innocuous documents stamped `` Secret '' lose respect for the system , and that puts all secrets , the real ones as well as the purely nominal ones , at risk . Excessive classification also means that even low-level or nonsensitive government positions often require clearances . One in every 50 American adults now has access to classified information , not a winning formula for keeping secrets . The Senate bill , however , does nothing serious to address the problem of overclassification . Indeed , it perpetuates the fiction that all classified information poses a dire threat . The bill strips intelligence community employees of their pensions if the Director of National Intelligence decides they leaked classified information , even if the information reveals only that Dagestani weddings last three days . It revokes the clearances of officials who disclose the existence of classified covert operations -- even if the operations , like the raid on Osama bin Laden 's compound , are in the past and could not possibly be jeopardized by disclosure . Worse , the Senate bill extends the shroud of secrecy to encompass even unclassified information . Intelligence officials already must submit any publications that discuss their work to their agencies for pre-publication review and approval ; under the bill , they must submit `` anticipated oral remarks '' as well . On its face , the provision could require pre-publication review for dinner party conversations . The bill also bars current and recent intelligence officials from contracting with the media to provide commentary on any intelligence or national security matters . No member of the intelligence community , for instance , could provide paid commentary on the war in Afghanistan . Opinion : Obama leak 'scandal ' is wildly overblown . Most alarming of all , the bill prohibits any intelligence official other than the agency 's director , deputy director or designated public affairs officer from providing off-the-record information `` regarding intelligence activities '' -- classified or unclassified -- to the media . If successful , this provision would ensure that the public hears only the party line on all matters relating to intelligence policy . It also would effectively prohibit whistleblowing . Intelligence officials could raise concerns through approved government channels , but if that failed would have no meaningful way to bring evidence of government fraud , waste , abuse , or illegality to the public 's attention . How to deal with disclosures of classified information about government misconduct is a tricky question . How to deal with disclosures of unclassified information about government misconduct should be a no-brainer . Such disclosures should be welcomed and encouraged . The law already falls short in this regard : the Whistleblower Protection Act protects other government employees against retaliation for whistle-blowing , but excludes members of the intelligence community . The Senate bill would turn this lack of protection into a virtual prohibition . Unauthorized leaks of properly classified information are a real problem . Grandstanding about authorized leaks of improperly classified information will not solve this problem , nor will cracking down on disclosures of unclassified information . If Congress wants to get serious about leaks , it will take steps to shrink the universe of secret government information , not expand it to encompass yet more information the public has every right to know . The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Elizabeth Goitein .
Elizabeth Goitein : Leaks are a symptom of the intelligence community 's culture of secrecy . Comment: One in every 50 American adults now has access to classified information , she says . Goitein : Senate bill would effectively prohibit whistle-blowing for intelligence officials .