Enabling the public in a democracy to know what their elected officials are doing in their name with their money needs no defense.  How many more times must it be proven that the overwhelming majority of ostensible "national security" secrets are really "protecting decision-makers from public accountability" secrets?

If people don't know what elected officials are actually doing, then on what basis are they make a selection in an election?  Should we all just vote for the candidate who says most convincingly, "I always have great reasons for all my acts, but I cannot disclose them, or the acts themselves, for reasons of national security."?