Open Records
There’s a good editorial over at the Tennessean on the open records games being played in the legislature. I’d rather see the update to the open records killed than see the intimidation tactics codified. The amendments are all about re-election efforts, a heads-up if you will, on what may show up in a mail piece.
From the Tennessean:
Sometimes, it seems some state lawmakers believe they’ve been elected to a private club, where they can then operate by concealing all the private club’s private records.
That’s the only conclusion to draw from amendments thrown into a good open-government bill in the House this week. A Senate companion bill under discussion is therefore better.
The House State and Local Government Committee passed a bill that seriously hurts and complicates the original legislation. The committee approved the bill in a way that will require notification of public officials when any records requests concerning those officials are made. That is an intimidating element to put in the legislation. It will have the effect of dissuading citizens from seeking requests. It will also be a needlessly time-consuming process to find out if a records request involves officials whom would need to be notified — which ironically is an issue being raised by lawmakers concerned about the overall intent of improving open-records laws.
Further, as amended, the House measure extends the length of time a request for records can be complied with, from five days to seven business days.
The amendments are designed to make it more difficult — not less — for citizens to gain access to public records. One amendment also means out-of-state residents may not always have the same access as Tennessee citizens, and the measure requires an ID for records requests.
4 Comments so far
Leave a comment
They think they can do this because we as “sheeple” fail to remind them exactly who they work for. We can make a difference and if we fail to do so, we only have ourselves as citizens to blame. When we quit treating them as royal appointees, they might actually stop believing it themselves.
By BCB on 05.02.08 1:35 pm
Why do sheeple have this attitude on the state level while not only allowing but encouraging secrecy at the national level as we are seeing now?
By SemiPundit on 05.03.08 8:47 am
What would you want released? Clinton’s documents? I mean after all, he has been out of office for 8 years. Or are you one of those that have to know every detail of every investigation? Well, that is not only impractical, but also counterproductive. I would not expect the state or local governments to release who is making undercover buys in a drug investigation. What we are talking about is what our elected legislators are doing. I want to know who took what stance on various issues. I don’t care if it is a city councilman, county commissioner, state rep or senator or anyone on the federal level. What are you looking for? Maybe we should be allowed all of the records of Rep. Bill Jefferson (D-LA) related to his bribery allegations? Oh, no. Even Bush thought that those records should be hidden from view. So Sheeple are taken advantage of on all levels. I am generally not a partisan, but want for the good of the nation. There are some areas where secrecy is critical; Nashville cannot claim too many instances of National Security type issues to require that level of secrecy. What they are doing here is simply trying to put enough obstacles in place so that Sheeple like us cannot or will not care any longer and they win.
By BCB on 05.03.08 11:25 am
[...] The state legislature is playing games with open records. Why is everyone so cynical these [...]
By Wednesday links round-up from around the FOIA-sphere « Open Records on 05.07.08 4:22 pm
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>