|
¶
What
ever happened to government of the people, by the people and for
the people? Reality is that government officials at every level
are doing their best to see to it that ordinary people are kept
as far out of the loop as possible. Federal documents are being
classified into various categories of secret at the rate of 30 a
minute -- 15.6 million last year. There is a veritable
bureaucratic army whose principal function is "creating and
filing secrets," said David Ledford, executive editor of the
News Journal.
At the
state level, the Freedom of Information Act, despite its
high-sounding statement of policy -- "[I]t is vital that
citizens have easy access to public records in order that
society remain free and democratic." -- is riddled with
loopholes. Not only is the General Assembly specifically
exempted from what provisions it does contain, but the attorney
general's duty to represent state agencies creates a conflict of
interest preventing his office from enforcing the act against
any of those agencies. The only way anyone can obtain compliance
beyond the local level is by the expensive course of appealing
to Court of Chancery.
Although
"citizens have the right to know what their government is
doing," Ellen Wasfi, president of the League of Women Voters of
Greater Dover, said the '9-11' terror attack has given public
officials a powerful deterrent to having that right exercised.
Security is "being used as an excuse for hiding information" in
cases where the only real danger is there potential
embarrassment, she said.
A
consequence -- unintended or otherwise -- of the U.S.A. Patriot
Act has been to create a "culture of secrecy," said Drewry
Fennell, executive director of the American Civil Liberties
Union of Delaware. "Since '9-11' we have seen a real movement
across the country ... to close the door on government," she
said.
Peter
Weitzel, coordinator of the Coalition of Journalists for Open
Government, said Delaware ranked 38th out of the 50 states in a
national study of how much 'sunshine' it lets in to view
governmental operations. A key failing of the state's Freedom of
Information Act is that 13 of its 14 stated exemptions "give the
[public] agency the ability to decide whether [something] falls
within the exemption."
A prime
example of how much light seeps in is the annual process of
enacting an array of significant legislation with minimal
scrutiny as the Assembly winds down its sessions with
well-into-the-night marathons on the last day of June, said
representative Robert Valihura. The most egregious abuse, he
said, is time-honored practice of 'walking around' a bill among
colleagues rather than following the process of having it aired
before a committee in open session. "You don't get much sunshine
at midnight," he quipped.
Those
comments were made at a recent symposium on openness in
government or lack thereof sponsored by the League of Women
Voters and the News Journal. The consensus which emerged was
clearly that the system is in dire need of reform. Attorney
general Carl Danberg and James Vaughn, president judge of
Superior Court, both said they would support changes in the
state law, but were not specific about what they should be.
A good
place to start would be to narrow the concept of 'personnel
matters' and 'pending or potential litigation" as just causes
for a public agency to shut the doors on discussion. If
interpreted broadly -- as is frequently done -- almost any
deliberation can be sheltered under that umbrella. The
determining factor if a particular situation should be is
whether it can be reasonably concluded that real and significant
harm to an individual will result from open discussion.
Since no
public gathering is really public unless the public knows about
it, an immediate reform would be to require agencies to post
notices where they can be seen in the normal course of a
person's activity. The law requires only that seven-days notice
be given -- unless it can be claimed that it is not possible to
give seven-days notice, in which case 24-hours notice will
suffice -- and that it be posted at the agency's office and the
place where the meeting is to be held. Virtually every public
agency nowadays has a website, so it would be logical that the
21st century equivalent to publishing a classified advertisement
in a 'newspaper of general circulation' would be to post it
conspicuously on the website. That would be cheaper and have the
advantage of allowing necessary changes if and when appropriate.
Such a requirement should include agencies' committees,
taskforces and advisory panels, which are included in the
requirements of the law but frequently have gatherings that go
unnoticed.
The
process of exercising the right to be informed also could stand
some serious tweaking. Except in instances where massive amounts
of information are sought, it should be made easy to inspect
public documents as a matter of course. A simple walk-in request
would be appropriate if the documents are of a nature that they
are kept in an immediately accessible file. At most, 24 hours
notice via telephone or e.mail that a request is going to be
made should suffice. A simple form to be filled out and signed
on the spot would provide an adequate record of the transaction.
A reasonable number of copies -- say a total of a dozen pages --
should be available without charge and a nominal charge levied
beyond that. After all, the requester's tax dollars pay the bill
for the routine business activity of copying.
The
process of adjudicating an alleged violation of the Freedom of
Information Act should be streamlined. Danberg told the
symposium that his office is not able to comply with a request
to review a claim within the 20 working days specified in the
law. It has whittled the average review time from 75 days to 45
days, but if the right to be informed is as basic as the state
law said it is, paying for paralegal staff to handle the routine
processing steps would seem justified.
Present
procedure also provides the agency complained about the
opportunity to respond in detail to the citizen's complaint. In
most cases, a lawyer does the responding. The matter is then
decided without the complainant having the opportunity to
respond to the response. It stands to reason that, absent an
open-and-shut situation, the odds are against a lawyer ruling
against a professionally prepared brief in favor of an amateur's
complaint.
Michael
Tupman, the deputy attorney general with primary responsibility
for handling freedom-of-information complaints, said he could
not specify the ratio between rulings favoring the complainant
and those supporting the agency. But he "guess[ed] it might be
about 50-50." Since a person is not likely to pursue the matter
beyond an initial rejection without reason to believe he or she
has been wronged, Tupman's estimate, if accurate, is not
encouraging. Again relying on the truth of the claim in the law
about what is fundamentally at stake, commissioning a
freedom-of-information ombudsman with no other ties to
government at any level would be appropriate.
And when
all is considered, a remedy beyond simply telling an agency it
has sinned and advising it not to do that again would be
appropriate. A few years ago, Common Cause of Delaware attempted
to insert penalties for officials who violate the law. Until
something like that is done, it is hard to believe that the
idealistic discussion at the seminar will go much further than
being only that.
¶
Somehow
it has proved difficult to see how the package of
proposed
legislation being put before the Assembly qualifies as, in the
words of the governor's press notice, "solving Delaware's energy
challenge." Unless there is something in there that has been
overlooked, it appears to be little more than throwing money --
John Q. Public's money -- at the problem.
If
enacted, the laws would use a combination of tax money and
surcharges to finance energy conservation and financial
assistance to low-income households to pay their heating and
cooling bills. State government would be authorized to seek more
favorable rates from alternate electricity suppliers while
Delmarva Power and Delaware Electric Cooperative customers,
without comparable bargaining power, would be allowed to phase
in the planned massive rate increase provided they pay the
equivalent of interest on what they 'defer' past the May 1
effective date.
What's
lacking is the spoonful of sugar to make the medicine go down.
Conspicuous by their absence from the package are measures to
re-regulate electricity rates until the competition originally
envisioned actually materializes and an effective excess-profits
tax to assure that the impending rates are as justified as the
companies claim.
¶
If
terrorists ever have the audacity to target Dillingham, Alaska,
-- population 2,400; access not easy -- they'll find Big Brother
well prepared. Thanks to a Department of Homeland Security
grant, the tiny snowbound burg is covered from every angle with
360°
surveillance cameras.
CLICK HERE
to read the Los Angeles Times article.
¶
In churches, mosques, ashrams, "healing rooms," prayer groups and homes
nationwide, millions of Americans offer prayers daily to heal themselves,
family, friends, co-workers and even people found through the Internet. Fueled
by the upsurge in religious expression in the United States, prayer is the most
common complement to mainstream medicine, far outpacing acupuncture, herbs,
vitamins and other alternative remedies.
MORE
¶
When
you think about it, it makes a lot of sense. Concerned about
drunken drivers and other bad things people do when they have
had too much, the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission is looking
to attack the problem where it occurs -- in bars. The commission
sent undercover agents into 36 bars and arrested 30 for
violating the state law against being intoxicated in public.
¶
Public humiliation on Comedy Central's ''The Colbert Report" is becoming a
rite of passage for the closely divided U.S. House of Representatives, whose members
allow themselves and their districts to be ridiculed in the interests of
reaching young voters ahead of elections that could decide party control of the
chamber.
CLICK HERE
to read the Boston Globe article.
|