If the press ran state government

Published June 3, 2015

by Patrick Gannon, The Insider, June 2, 2015.

There we were, members of the state capital press corps, lined up like sardines against a wall in one of the smaller committee rooms available at the legislative complex.

The size of the room didn't match the enormity of the debate that would take place there in a few minutes. The question of the day was whether to allow state-employed magistrates to opt out of performing same-sex marriages if they have "sincerely held religious objections" against them, a highly divisive issue.

But because of the small committee room, only about a dozen members of the public – not including press, General Assembly staff and legislators – were able to watch the meeting live. And they all probably showed up an hour or more before the debate started to get their seats.

It got me wondering: What if reporters were in charge of the statehouse? Here's how things would be different:

We wouldn't hold debates on controversial bills in small committee rooms, especially when much larger rooms are available. At the debate on the magistrates bill, a long line formed outside the committee room at the Legislative Office Building, as the House staff refused entry to lobbyists and others because the room was at capacity. Earlier this session, the same room was the setting for an emotional debate about legalizing marijuana for medical use. Yes, that room is wired, and audio is available through the Internet, but it's not the same as being there. The lawmaking process should be available to the public.

We wouldn't bring votes to the full House or Senate on the same days that they are approved by committees. This has become more the rule than the exception in the House this session. This leads to House members voting on bills they haven't read – or even heard of in some cases. Reporters know how annoying it is to see bills on the calendar that we know nothing about. I assume legislators feel the same way. The General Assembly meets over the course of several months each year. It doesn't make sense to rush bills through the process. What's one more day?

We would respond to public records requests, even if it's to say it's going to take some time. Way too many times, public information requests to state government agencies take a long time to fill, if they're filled at all. State public records laws require that requests are completed "as promptly as possible."

They are "public" records for a reason, and it shouldn't take an act of God for "public" agencies to respond. (Media outlets that file overly broad requests should be required to narrow them so state employees can work on other requests as well. Media shouldn't go on fishing expeditions.)

Lobbyists and other visitors to legislative committee rooms would get an electric shock when they sit in the seats clearly marked for "press." Way too often, media members show up at committee meetings to find the chairs dedicated to them filled by lobbyists, state employees or others. We assume they can read, but just don't follow instructions well.

Along the same lines, seats in the "press" conference room at the General Assembly would be reserved for media members, not advocates of whatever issue is up for discussion at the news conference. On at least three recent occasions, media members have had to stand or sit on the floor in the press conference room – which includes a couple dozen chairs – because supporters of whatever issue was being discussed had taken every seat before we arrived. Next time, I think a boycott is in order.

June 3, 2015 at 8:12 am
Frank Burns says:

Please boycott, the public is tired of the press not doing their job in reporting the news objectively.

June 3, 2015 at 10:22 am
Richard L Bunce says:

if many members of the press do not advocate for issues... and are transparent about their function and the outside interests influencing them... and their is no FOI for the media.