November 30, 2007
DO YOU TRUST YOUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE TO HAVE YOUR BEST INTERESTS AT HEART WHEN THEY MEET BEHIND CLOSED DOORS?
There is a lot of discussion in the media about changing the open meeting rules and criteria. In the face of all the indictments and corruption that has happened, it is hard to justify the desire for changes put forth by Ulysses Jones and the confirmation of this change by the Shelby County Commission in an 11-0 vote.
I understand the desire to be able to talk one on one in private and if every politician was an honest public servant who had the interests of the taxpayer at heart, there would be no problem. However history, both past and present, indicates that politicians generally have their own interest front and center ahead of the publics’ interests. You only need to look at the recent Knoxville debacle to see what happens when high paying public jobs come open and the public servants decide to split up the pie. The most revealing indication of political inclination is the fact that the Tennessee legislature refuses to apply the same open records laws that they dictate for every local politician to themselves. This is analogous to the United States Congress and Senate that dictates that everyone but them selves have social security but they refuse to participate themselves and instead have a plush and generous retirement plan of their own.
There is a fall back position that could keep the public informed but give the local politicians some slack. If two or more politicians want to exchange ideas away from the public meeting, they could exchange emails with a copy to the media and another copy posted on the public website of the city or county. This would force the politicians to put their thoughts on electronic paper, organize their thinking and research and still ask the recipient of the email to consider his ideas and answer his questions. Another possibility is to require any such meetings to be reported on the political website in a meeting report with the date, time and subject matter noted on the posted report.
Let face it. The public does not trust politicians to act in their best interests when they meet in private and the record indicates that the public is correct.
DO YOU TRUST YOUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE TO HAVE YOUR BEST INTERESTS AT HEART WHEN THEY MEET BEHIND CLOSED DOORS?
There is a lot of discussion in the media about changing the open meeting rules and criteria. In the face of all the indictments and corruption that has happened, it is hard to justify the desire for changes put forth by Ulysses Jones and the confirmation of this change by the Shelby County Commission in an 11-0 vote.
I understand the desire to be able to talk one on one in private and if every politician was an honest public servant who had the interests of the taxpayer at heart, there would be no problem. However history, both past and present, indicates that politicians generally have their own interest front and center ahead of the publics’ interests. You only need to look at the recent Knoxville debacle to see what happens when high paying public jobs come open and the public servants decide to split up the pie. The most revealing indication of political inclination is the fact that the Tennessee legislature refuses to apply the same open records laws that they dictate for every local politician to themselves. This is analogous to the United States Congress and Senate that dictates that everyone but them selves have social security but they refuse to participate themselves and instead have a plush and generous retirement plan of their own.
There is a fall back position that could keep the public informed but give the local politicians some slack. If two or more politicians want to exchange ideas away from the public meeting, they could exchange emails with a copy to the media and another copy posted on the public website of the city or county. This would force the politicians to put their thoughts on electronic paper, organize their thinking and research and still ask the recipient of the email to consider his ideas and answer his questions. Another possibility is to require any such meetings to be reported on the political website in a meeting report with the date, time and subject matter noted on the posted report.
Let face it. The public does not trust politicians to act in their best interests when they meet in private and the record indicates that the public is correct.
posted by watchdog at
8:17 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home