Once I served on the Fircrest Metropolis Council in Pierce County, we handed legal guidelines, adopted budgets and debated coverage, all below the total glare of Washington’s Public Information Act. We weren’t particular. We have been accountable.
Throughout Washington, greater than 1,800 native legislative our bodies, from college boards to metropolis councils, govern below the identical sunshine legislation. They do their work in public, launch their data when requested and in some way democracy doesn’t collapse. In truth, it thrives.
So why does the Washington Legislature insist it wants a particular constitutional proper to secrecy?
That’s the query on the middle of my lawsuit, Nixon v. State of Washington, now earlier than the Courtroom of Appeals. As lead plaintiff, I’m difficult the Legislature’s sweeping declare that “legislative privilege” permits lawmakers to withhold inside communications (textual content messages, invoice technique memos, workers speaking factors, and so forth.) from public data requests.
If upheld, this privilege would create a category of public officers who’re immune from the identical transparency obligations each different legislative physique in Washington has been topic to till now. It could defend backroom discussions about laws, together with selections that immediately have an effect on our rights, taxes and providers. It could render elements of the Public Information Act meaningless.
I’ve additionally labored contained in the Capitol. For 5 years, I used to be a staffer within the Legislature. I perceive the pressures, the complexities and the necessity for candid dialogue. I additionally know this: The Legislature can govern successfully with out secrecy.
This month, a taxpayer-funded group that claims to serve all legislatures in a nonpartisan trend, The Nationwide Convention of State Legislatures, filed a quick in courtroom backing the Washington Legislature’s secrecy declare. The convention’s argument mirrors the one already made by legislative management: that inside deliberations are too delicate to share with the general public. That transparency would in some way harm the lawmaking course of.
If different legislative our bodies can get the job performed below such scrutiny, what makes the state Legislature so uniquely fragile? Neither legislative leaders nor NCSL has put forth a justifiable cause for this.
I’ve been within the room the place coverage is made. I’ve negotiated controversial points. I’ve answered to constituents. I did all of it with out hiding behind privilege. College boards, port commissions and county councils throughout this state do the identical day by day. If they’ll govern below the Public Information Act, so can the Legislature.
The concept lawmakers have to be shielded from disclosure to do their jobs is an insult to public servants and to the general public. It implies that candor solely prospers in darkness, and that our elected officers are too fragile to deliberate if somebody may learn their messages later. It’s a handy argument for anybody who doesn’t need their course of questioned, however it doesn’t maintain water in a democracy.
And right here’s what’s most harmful: If this privilege is upheld for the state Legislature, nothing would cease an area authorities from claiming the identical exemption. A metropolis council going through public strain over housing coverage may begin redacting emails. A college board in battle over curriculum may defend textual content chains. Little by little, the general public’s proper to know would erode.
This isn’t nearly one case. It’s about whether or not the general public has a proper to see how coverage will get made, or whether or not elected officers get to determine what’s “too delicate” for the individuals to deal with.
Washington’s Structure opens with a robust reality: “All political energy is inherent within the individuals.” Legislative privilege turns that precept on its head.
There’s no query that inside deliberations might be messy. Concepts are floated and dropped. Methods shift, politics become involved, however that’s exactly why we’d like transparency. It’s how we maintain energy accountable, not only for what legal guidelines get handed, however how and why they take form.
If lawmakers really imagine within the power and integrity of their course of, they need to be proud to let the general public see it. As a result of if they’ll’t do the individuals’s work with out hiding it … perhaps they shouldn’t be doing it in any respect.
If you want to share your ideas, please submit a Letter to the Editor of not more than 200 phrases to be thought-about for publication in our Opinion part. Ship to: letters@seattletimes.com
