When I was a young officer woking Army current intel, nothing would anger me more that the tendency to overclassify. Things that should never have been classified were, and those that should have been were classified often at levels higher than necessary or desireable. There was also the pernicious tendency (see current rules) to try to use FOUO - an administrative protection designed to protect privacy or FBIS violation of copyright laws - as a cheap substitute for proper classification. As Dr. Jack's post shows, this is still the case since some of the examples of FOUO he lists fall under the formal definitions of CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET, and TOP SECRET.
Then there is the ludicrous briefing posted by Marc - FOUO for no good reason other than it is embarrasssing ... often another improper reason for classification - that he, an obvious foreign security risk from that oh so foreign country (is it our ally?) Canada, found openly published on the web in violation of its stupid administrative protection.
Note that classification and administrative protections derive from Presidential Executive Orders and are not (unless things have changed more than I am aware) matters of legislation but only of regulation. Indeed, there is only classified material and unclassified for national security purposes. Sensitive (formerly SBU) is another attempt to get around the rules for clasification. Nevertheless, Article I, Sec 8 of the US Constitution vests Congress with the regulation of the land and naval forces of the US. This seems to me to be one of those moments when we, as individuals who range from liberal to conservative, can call on our elected representatives to do their duty and change, by legislation or its threat, a totally idiotic regulation. Ike Skelton and Carl Levin and our individual Reps and Senators would love to hear from us. I will be writing my Rep, Tom Cole (on the Armed Services Committee) along with his sole Democratic colleague from Oklahoma, Dan Boren (also a committee member).