|
|
6-07-2007
Accountability is sorely lacking
By Charles N. Davis
Guest Columnist
Congress, apparently content to explore ever-new depths in
public disapproval, is on the verge of having a single member
derail the most meaningful reform in years of the federal Freedom
of Information Act.
How, you ask, when overwhelming majorities support the
legislation in both the House and Senate?
The secret hold, of course. Ever heard of the secret hold? It's
a relic of the stuffed shirts of yesteryear, smoke-filled rooms
and fat cats with stogies guffawing over the latest bamboozle of
the taxpaying schmucks. Think country clubs, secret handshakes
and bizarre rituals.
Members of the Society of Professional Journalists called every
senator, one by one, until at last " when it became clear he
could hide no longer " Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), came blinking and
grimacing into the sunlight and admitted that it was he who
placed a secret hold ... on a bill that addresses secrecy in government.
You can't make this stuff up.
Sen. Kyl " this year's Secrecy Champion " has several asyet-
unstated objections to the Freedom of Information Reform
Act, a bill that would significantly improve one of the strongest
tools Americans have to supervise the inner workings of government
and to hold elected officials accountable.
The bill has plenty of bipartisan support. The U.S. House of
Representatives in March approved a version of the bill with 80
Republicans joining 228 Democrats for a 308-117 vote.
The Senate Judiciary Committee then unanimously sent the
measure forward to the full Senate for a vote.
his would be the moment where our senators hold a public
debate on the merits and demerits of the legislation at hand,
then vote. But not when senators, using an archaic parliamentarian
parlor trick, can stop a bill dead in its tracks merely by
telling their party's Senate leader or secretary that they wish to
place a hold on the bill. That's when Sen. Kyl slipped in the
hold.
The practice of honoring secret holds has no basis in law and
has no support in Senate rules. It's a good-'ol-boy creation and
another of the seemingly endless perks of the Senate, where the
rules always seem to benefit the representatives far more than
the pesky public.
Tear down the whole argument in favor of secret holds, and
it comes down to cowardice: it allows a senator to cower behind
anonymity while signaling their dislike for a piece of legislation.
More to the point, it takes what would be a single losing
vote on the floor of the Senate and converts it, magically, into
stoppage of legislation.
That's awesome power with absolutely no accountability.
Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), who discloses his holds as a
matter of practice, introduced an amendment in 2006 to force
all senators to identify themselves when placing a hold on a bill.
That proposal has gone nowhere fast.
Are you surprised?
Charles N. Davis, a member of Society of Professional Journalists's
Freedom of Information Committee, serves as the executive
director of the National Freedom of Information Coalition
at the University of Missouri School of Journalism.
|
|
|