RSSAn open, accountable government is essential
Yakima Herald-Republic
E-mail
Print
Comments
More 'Opinion'
- We've got feline fever. Go Wildcats!
- Trust would better ensure return on bailout bucks
- Trust judicial system: Try 9/11 suspects in Manhattan
- Agencies must prove they can work together on clean water
- Selah Creek plan reflects bold thinking
- Don't marginalize voters to gain more immediacy
- Actions of WSU, Congress clear away some of recession gloom
A good friend making a run for public office asked this past weekend how, besides stressing his character, background and experience, he could differentiate himself from others in a crowded field for the post he is seeking.
Pardon the bad baseball metaphor, but the question came across like a high fastball to a clean-up hitter. I offered an answer with little hesitation.
"Talk about accountability," I advised. "Talk about transparency."
Talk about creating a culture of openness in a local agency that has a history of being run by scofflaws with open hostility to the web of open-government and accountability laws that help Washingtonians keep an eye on the workings of their governmental agencies and the public servants, elected and nonelected, who work for them.
Thankfully, the advice I offered was well received by my friend. I am confident he will use it, and not just as campaign rhetoric. It will be an attitude he will bring to governing if he is elected.
What is sad, however, is that such an attitude can indeed be a point of differentiation. It ought to be the rule, not the exception, for all those who serve in government at any level.
This evening, Yakima residents and others in Central Washington can attend a free public forum at Yakima's downtown library on the importance of open government and the citizen vigilance needed to maintain it.
The forum is being presented by the Washington Coalition for Open Government, thanks to sponsorship support from the Yakima Herald-Republic and the League of Women Voters of Yakima County.
Herald-Republic Managing Editor Barbara Serrano will moderate a discussion by a distinguished and knowledgeable panel that includes former state Rep. Toby Nixon, state Assistant Attorney General Tim Ford, Sunnyside City Clerk Deborah Estrada and state Rep. Norm Johnson.
State Auditor Brian Sonntag, an avid watchdog and champion of open government in this state, had been slated to be a part of the panel. But the death of his brother made his attendance impossible. Johnson readily stepped in as a panel replacement for the state auditor.
America's founding fathers recognized that the free flow of information was essential to a healthy and vibrant democracy. James Madison, the nation's fourth president who is sometimes called the "Father of the Constitution," wrote in an 1822 letter to Kentucky statesman William T. Barry:
"A popular government, without popular information or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
Americans are watching the post-election protests in Iran, and that government's attempt to stifle free speech and cut off the free flow of information, with understandably righteous repulsion. As imperfect as our system of government can be, we cannot imagine an election so corrupt, a vote-counting process so secretive, nor attempts to stifle free expression so ugly, blatant and repressive.
That's good. But it is also important to understand that among the reasons we can't imagine those horrors here is because of founding fathers like Madison and insightful state leaders who sponsored the 1972 citizens' initiative that gave rise to Washington's public disclosure and open government laws.
The common bond that links those 19th century and 20th century champions to the challenges of 21st century citizenry is the understanding that democratic governments belong to the people they serve and represent. So do the written instruments and records of those governments -- all of them, except for narrowly drawn exceptions.
Never ending, however, are attempts to expand that list of exceptions through legislative actions, legal actions, loopholes and bureaucratic sleights of hand. The Washington Coalition for Open Government exists, and conducts events like tonight's forum, to educate the public about the importance of access to government information and meetings.
The public's right to know what their governments are doing to them and for them is a precious right that is at the heart of what makes our democracy special. It should never be taken for granted.
* Kenneth F. Bunting, a founding board member for the Washington Coalition for Open Government, was Associate Publisher and a former Executive Editor of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. He is also a member of the state "Sunshine Committee."
Public forum
• WHAT: Free public forum on state open records and meetings laws.
• WHEN: 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. tonight.
• WHERE: Downtown Yakima library, 102 N. Third St.
• ORGANIZER: Washington Coalition for Open Government, a nonpartisan group dedicated to preserving the public's right to know about government activities.
• SPONSORS: Yakima Herald-Republic and the League of Women Voters of Yakima County.
"America's founding fathers recognized that the free flow of information was essential to a healthy and vibrant democracy."
I hate to tell you, Mr. Bunting, but America's founders were scornful of "democracies". They founded this country as a representative republic, which is significantly different from a 'democracy'. You might want to re-do your research. Seems you missed a significant point.
"Talk about accountability," I advised. "Talk about transparency."
You could start by telling us which candidate you were talking to, so we know which candidate is taking campaign advice from the Herald staff.
Don't you find it slightly hypocritical that the Herald is leading the charge against certain city council members for secretly taking political advice from the owner of the Business Times, while at the same time you're secretly giving political advice to another politician who you won't identify?
I'm guessing that it never even crossed your mind.
I for one find it interesting that two such liberal organizations like the YHR and League of Women Voters would want 'transparency in government' when bigger government is one of the staples of their liberal movement.
Report ViolationHow can the advice be secret when it has been published in this editorial? The only thing not disclosed is who the candidate is. Additionally, I don't see anywhere in this piece that indicates anything but two friends talking - it's not like the candidate sought the opinion of someone because they were a YHR staffer, but because they were a friends. Please explain how this conversation between a "candidate" for office and a YHR staffer/friend has anything remotely in common with elected officials working with Bruce Smith behind closed doors to stifle discussion and move forward an agenda without said discussion. What an incredible stretch.
Report ViolationYakRob,
They advise the candidate to campaign on "transparency", yet they won't even identify the candidate in this article. If you can't see the irony in that, I can't help you.
Almost every pol promises transparency then proves that was just another campaign lie. Take B. Hussein Obama for example.
Report ViolationYes, let's take President Obama for example - please tell me how he has not been transparent?
Report ViolationI'm not asking anyone to help me see anything - I simply am asking how this and the "Bruce Smith issue" have anything in common. Since you aren't able to answer that, I will assume you cannot draw a logical comparison and the statement was simply based on opinion rather then facts.
Report Violationsjuan, did you read the part that said, "Kenneth F. Bunting, Guest commentary"? Or the part that said, "Kenneth F. Bunting, a founding board member for the Washington Coalition for Open Government, was Associate Publisher and a former Exectuive Editor of the Seattle Post-Intellignecer. He is also a member of the state 'Sunshine Committee'?" I have read the entire commentary twice over and can't find the part that says, "the Herald staff".
Report Violation2007ElectraGlide,
Yes I did notice after I wrote my comment. I also read this:
SPONSORS: Yakima Herald-Republic and the League of Women Voters of Yakima County.
None of that changes my main point that the author (former Executive Editor of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer)is calling for transparency, yet won't identify which candidate he's talking to.
"Yes, let's take President Obama for example - please tell me how he has not been transparent?"
Tell me too! I like facts and examples!
By the way, it is hard to take people seriously who only refer to our president as B. Hussein Obama... no one ever really referred to G. Walker Bush, B. Jefferson Clinton or J. Sidney McCain.
wsujc210,
Here's a pretty big one I'd say:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123456958734386181.html
1,073 Pages
A stimulus bill that's anything but transparent.
In his closing remarks on the stimulus bill yesterday, House Appropriations Chairman David Obey called it "the largest change in domestic policy since the 1930s." We'd say more like the 1960s, which is bad enough, but his point about the bill's magnitude is right. The 1,073-page monstrosity includes the biggest spending increase since World War II, but more important is the fine print expanding the role of the federal government across the breadth of American business, health care, energy and welfare policy.
Given those stakes, you might think Congress would get more than a few hours to debate it. But, no, yesterday's roll call votes came less than 24 hours after House-Senate conferees had agreed to their deal. Democrats rushed the bill to the floor before Members could even read it, much less have time to broadcast the details so the public could offer its verdict.
So much for Democratic promises of a new era of transparency. Only this Tuesday the House unanimously approved a resolution promising 48-hour public notice before holding a roll call. Even better, the bill could have been posted on the Internet, as candidate Barack Obama suggested during the campaign. Let voters see what they're getting for all this money. Not a chance.
This high-handed endgame follows the pattern of this bill from the start, with Republicans all but ignored until Democrats let three GOP Senators nibble around the edges to prevent a filibuster. With their huge majorities, Mr. Obey and Democrats got their epic victory. But far from a new, transparent way of governing, this bill represents the kind of old-fashioned partisan politics that Tom DeLay would have admired.
Another:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/06/22/MNVG18BB6I.DTL&type=politics
Obama pledge of legislative transparency fails
During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama promised that once a bill was passed by Congress, the White House would post it online for five days before he signed it.
More News
"When there's a bill that ends up on my desk as president, you the public will have five days to look online and find out what's in it before I sign it, so that you know what your government's doing," Obama said as a candidate, telling voters he would make government more transparent and accountable.
When he took office in January, his team added that in posting nonemergency bills, it would "allow the public to review and comment" before Obama signed them.
Five months into his administration, Obama has signed two dozen bills, but he has almost never waited five days. On the recent credit-card legislation, which included a controversial measure to allow guns in national parks, he waited just two.....
You are correct that there is a problem with the process and that President Obama has yet to fulfill his pledge to give the public 5 days to review EVERY PIECE OF legislation before it is signed. This administration has admitted as much. They further have agreed with critics who claim that by the time it has passed the House and Senate, five days is not enough time to review and comment - thus, this administration is developing a system to provide links to proposed legislation at the time it comes out of Committee, giving US far more time to review and comment. Seems to me that this administration heard the criticism, reviewed the proposed policy, and made adjustments to that policy based on reality and how best to achieve optimal transparency for the people. It sounds like a well run office to me - flexible, able to admit when something isn't working, and most importantly, able to adjust to fix what's broken. It would seem that you are holding President Obama to a standard that demands perfection - too bad you didn't insist on that with our former President.
Report ViolationIt's time to vote against the politicians who have done more to advance their incumbencies than to serve the voters. The number of career politicians is staggering. A movement of Vote of No Confidence www.voteofnoconfidence.org is targeting the entrenched bureaucracy which has lost site of the critical functions of government, and these politicians have instead continued to expand government beyond the means of fiscal responsibility. "When the representative body have lost the confidence of their constituents, when they have notoriously made sale of their most valuable rights, when they have assumed to themselves powers which the people never put into their hands, then, indeed, their continuing in office becomes dangerous to the State, and calls for an exercise of the power of dissolution."
--Thomas Jefferson
Posting Guidelines - Updated Aug. 21 2009
Readers are encouraged to use these forums to discuss issues affecting the
Yakima Valley. Debate the ideas presented in stories and other comments, but
refrain from personal attacks and offensive remarks aimed at others; e.g.,
you may call an idea idiotic, but don't say the person is an idiot. The
Herald-Republic reserves the right to remove any comment for any reason.
Examples include material that is obscene, encourages illegal activity or
stereotypes based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs and
other factors. Continued violation of these guidelines can lead to
suspension or revocation of your ability to post comments. If you believe a
comment is inappropriate, you can bring it to our attention by clicking the
"report violation" link by each comment. Guidelines revised Aug. 21, 2009.
Registered User?
