Published: Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Do you know what your state legislator has been up to?
As state lawmakers pass the half-way point of the 2009 legislative session and begin passing important legislation, do you really know what they're doing on your behalf? Sure, you can watch the floor debates and public portions of legislative hearings. You may even be able to read the text of an amended bill before it is voted on, if you pay close attention. But is this level of transparency sufficient to hold our elected officials accountable or should we have the same access to the activities of state legislators as we do local elected officials in our state?
This important question received added relevance last week as a scandal erupted in the Legislature. Just as lawmakers were preparing to vote on a highly controversial union bill, the governor, speaker of the House and Senate majority leader announced the bill was dead and would no longer be considered. The reason for this dramatic decision? E-mails were being sent to legislators "linking potential action on the bill to campaign contributions." This sounds an awful lot like bribery; offering a legislator money to advance a private interest, in this case a labor union.
While the action by state leaders to kill this bill is to be commended, we only know about this egregious violation because lawmakers decided to tell the public. Under the state public records law, legislative communications such as e-mails are exempt from disclosure.
Closer to our wallets than this brewing e-mail scandal are legislators' actions concerning the state's multibillion dollar budget deficit and potential tax increases. For months state newspaper reporters have been trying to learn lawmakers' plans concerning the budget and tax increases. Foot dragging by the Legislature to release this information led some of these reporters to write articles and blog posts about the trouble they were having accessing this vital information to help inform the public about the options. Only after this heightened media scrutiny were some of the details recently released.
As these examples demonstrate, it is time to remove this Grand Canyon sized loophole from the state public records law and subject state lawmakers to the same disclosure requirements as every other local government official. It will also help fulfill the purpose of the state's open government law, which reads, "The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies that serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may maintain control over the instruments that they have created."
Thankfully, the state's Sunshine Committee at its Wednesday meeting this week will consider a recommendation to remove the legislative exemption from the public records law. Unfortunately, this important public committee is slated for elimination under bills moving through the Legislature.
Regardless of what the Sunshine Committee does or its fate, there should be no distinction between the Legislature and any other local or state governmental entity when it comes to the state's open government laws. To lead by example, the Legislature should subject itself to all the requirements of the Public Record Act and Open Public Meetings Act. Then and only then will we truly know what they are doing on our behalf.
Jason Mercier is director of the Center for Government Reform at Washington Policy Center, a nonpartisan policy research organization in Seattle and Olympia (www.washingtonpolicy.org). He also serves as treasurer on the board of the Washington Coalition for Open Government.
This important question received added relevance last week as a scandal erupted in the Legislature. Just as lawmakers were preparing to vote on a highly controversial union bill, the governor, speaker of the House and Senate majority leader announced the bill was dead and would no longer be considered. The reason for this dramatic decision? E-mails were being sent to legislators "linking potential action on the bill to campaign contributions." This sounds an awful lot like bribery; offering a legislator money to advance a private interest, in this case a labor union.
While the action by state leaders to kill this bill is to be commended, we only know about this egregious violation because lawmakers decided to tell the public. Under the state public records law, legislative communications such as e-mails are exempt from disclosure.
Closer to our wallets than this brewing e-mail scandal are legislators' actions concerning the state's multibillion dollar budget deficit and potential tax increases. For months state newspaper reporters have been trying to learn lawmakers' plans concerning the budget and tax increases. Foot dragging by the Legislature to release this information led some of these reporters to write articles and blog posts about the trouble they were having accessing this vital information to help inform the public about the options. Only after this heightened media scrutiny were some of the details recently released.
As these examples demonstrate, it is time to remove this Grand Canyon sized loophole from the state public records law and subject state lawmakers to the same disclosure requirements as every other local government official. It will also help fulfill the purpose of the state's open government law, which reads, "The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies that serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may maintain control over the instruments that they have created."
Thankfully, the state's Sunshine Committee at its Wednesday meeting this week will consider a recommendation to remove the legislative exemption from the public records law. Unfortunately, this important public committee is slated for elimination under bills moving through the Legislature.
Regardless of what the Sunshine Committee does or its fate, there should be no distinction between the Legislature and any other local or state governmental entity when it comes to the state's open government laws. To lead by example, the Legislature should subject itself to all the requirements of the Public Record Act and Open Public Meetings Act. Then and only then will we truly know what they are doing on our behalf.
Jason Mercier is director of the Center for Government Reform at Washington Policy Center, a nonpartisan policy research organization in Seattle and Olympia (www.washingtonpolicy.org). He also serves as treasurer on the board of the Washington Coalition for Open Government.
Comments
(