Better Government Association

Our Views: Transparency in government

Advocate Opinion page staff
Published: Aug 2, 2007 - Page: 8B

Across the country, according to Governing magazine, measures against government secrecy are making a comeback.

Is Louisiana following this beneficial trend, or fighting it?

If the results of the most recent legislative session are any indication, Louisiana’s message about government transparency is mixed, to say the least.

Lawmakers approved bills that limit public access to information about the work that government does.

After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, concerns about terrorism created a rationale for more government secrecy at the federal level. Taking a cue from Washington, state leaders and local leaders across the country embraced more secrecy, too.

“We’ve been getting governors and mayors who think they’re running little White Houses,” Charles Davis, director of the Missouri-based Freedom of Information Coalition, told Governing.

But since 2005, according to Melissa Maynard’s story in the magazine’s July issue, the pendulum in several states seems to be swinging in favor of more transparency.

In New York State, for example, newly elected Gov. Eliot Spitzer has signed an executive order requiring state agencies to Webcast proceedings that are covered by the state’s open-meetings laws. In Florida, newly elected Gov. Charlie Crist has signed an executive order aimed at expediting access to public records.

While executive orders can be helpful in advancing transparency, they lack the force and durability of statutory law.

Ultimately, government transparency at the state level is determined largely by legislatures. That reality underscores the need for people to closely monitor how legislators vote when laws regarding public access to information are considered.

Residents of Louisiana have cause for concern on this issue after the most recent session of the Legislature, according to the Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, a nonpartisan, nonprofit group that studies state issues. In its wrap-up of the session, PAR noted that lawmakers tended to value confidentiality over transparency.

The passage of House Bill 964, for example, will allow certain nonprofit health-care corporations working with the state to shield many internal documents from the public.

“This measure will likely be followed by others proposed by similar groups that want the same protection from public records requirements, thereby further eroding Louisiana’s sunshine laws,” PAR predicted.

PAR also noted that a measure to require that the Louisiana Senate Webcast and archive all legislative floor proceedings and committee hearings went nowhere during the session. The Louisiana House of Representatives already provides such services. However, the Senate does not provide similar access in two of its committee rooms, nor does it maintain video copies of meetings that are broadcast live.

As Governing magazine noted, state and local governments across the country are using new technology to give the public greater access to government meetings and documents.

While Louisiana isn’t mentioned in the Governing article, it’s clear the Louisiana Senate’s refusal to provide broadcasts and recordings of all its proceedings doesn’t position Louisiana as a progressive state.

In 2002, Louisiana ranked among the top five states in granting people access to public records, according to the Better Government Association’s Integrity Index. A PAR survey of legislation between 2003 and the most recent legislative session showed state lawmakers have passed about 45 laws dealing with public records. Twenty-four of the laws have expanded the realm of what the public is allowed to inspect, while 21 have exempted certain records from the public eye.

These numbers suggest the cause of transparency is far from lost, though public vigilance is needed to push Louisiana government farther into the sunlight.

Unfortunately, the most recent legislative session pushed us in the wrong direction.