EFF's Election Report ·
Gonzales Letter ·
Welfare Reform ·
Boeing Contract ·
Budget & Taxes ·
Business Climate ·
K-12 Fact Sheet ·
EFF Health Study ·
Paycheck Protection ·
Transportation ·
Unemployment Ins. ·
Receive Updates ·
Bookmark EFF ·
Contribute ·
EFF in the News ·
How Can I Help? ·
Join EFF ·
Media Center ·
|
COMMENTARY February 9, 2005 EFF testimony regarding HB 1758: Public records reform Jason Mercier | Evergreen
Freedom Foundation Since my comments before you last week went into great detail on the condition of Washington's public records law, and since many other distinguished individuals are here today to testify on HB 1758, I will keep my comments brief. Due to the damage done to Washington's public records law as a result of the Hangartner Supreme Court ruling last year, a broad-based and bipartisan public records coalition was formed to discuss ways to restore the people's access to public records. Members of that coalition are here today and our major concern is the court's decision to grant new exemptions from public records disclosure by allowing agencies to deny requests that are "over-broad" and those that may be considered subject to attorney-client privilege. Already we have seen some governmental entities seize on the "over-broad" exemption as grounds to deny a request rather than work with a requestor for clarification as was previously required under the law. Furthermore, the very concept of attorney-client privilege between government attorneys and government agencies is troubling when one considers just who the ultimate clients of taxpayer-funded attorneys are: the people. That said, HB 1758 does partially address some of the concerns the coalition outlined in HB 1350, which was pulled from consideration today. The one major caution with HB 1758 is in regard to its clarification of the attorney-client privilege exemption, whether that exemption should exist at all and in what form. But I'll let other members of the public records coalition address that. I want to thank you for your ongoing attention to strengthening Washington's public records law and also thank Attorney General McKenna for bringing this bill forward. With minor alteration, HB 1758 could address those problems created by the Supreme Court's Hangartner ruling. I'd be happy to answer any question you may have. Jason Mercier is a budget research analyst for the Evergreen Freedom Foundation. Contact: Jason Mercier | Budget Analyst | 360.956.3482
|
1 Part Honesty; 2 Parts Arrogance At a March 23, 2005, House Appropriations hearing on a bill to gut the voter-approved I-601 spending limit, Rep. Jim McIntire (D) asked a supporter of I-601’s two-third supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise taxes the following question: "Can you name a time when we [legislators] have actually not just set it [supermajority requirement] aside by majority vote? I mean, this is in many respects a procedural motion that has no bearing. It’s a statutory constraint that cannot constrain any legislature that chooses as a majority to set it aside . . . have we ever used a supermajority [to raise taxes]?" - Rep. Jim McIntire (D - 46) Despite the arrogance of some state officials, Washington's constitution is clear: "All political power is inherent in the people..." |
