We hear a lot about how awful Pennsylvania’s open records law is. And we should . . . because it is one of the worst in the nation. Simply put, if you want to see a public record in this state, you need to convince a public official, elected or otherwise, that you deserve to see it. You ask. They decide, often after a long wait. It’s like being put on hold when you call about your credit card charges – the longer you have to listen to the Muzak, the more likely you are to hang up and go away.
But there is movement out there. Leaders of both parties are openly vying with each other to demonstrate their enthusiasm for reform. The “right to know” is an issue that embraces a broad political spectrum from libertarians and small-government conservatives to liberal reformers – as well it should, for it is fundamental to democratic government. And while the stars will probably never be fully aligned on this issue, if ever there were a time to push for change, that time is now.
And some people are.
Tim Mahoney (D-Fayette) a freshman legislator who actually ran and got elected on this issue, has introduced House Bill 443 to drag our open records law into the 21st century. He has even persuaded House Democratic Majority Leader Bill DeWeese, a man not normally associated with such efforts, to sign on.
Governor Rendell is also drafting a bill as part of a broader measure of reforms to, in his words, “restore the public’s trust.”
“Citizens will not rest,” he said in a recent speech, “until there is an end to perks, an end to control by private interests and an end to political rules that shut them out of the process.” As we saw in the PHEAA case , the ability to deny access to public records is a sort of super perk because it allows public officials to hide all their other perks. And it certainly shuts citizens out of the process.
Not to be outdone, Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi (R-Delaware) is preparing legislation of his own – which his spokesman, Erik Arneson, announced with a shot across the governor’s bow: “On open records, Gov. Rendell’s track record is pretty shabby.”
Unlike Mahoney’s and Rendell’s bills, however, Pileggi’s will not “flip the presumption,” said Arneson, by making the records public unless proven otherwise.
The presumption needs to be flipped.
Finally, a grand jury recently called for a stronger state open records law as it recommended charges against a Haverford Township supervisor for secret dealings with a developer
“The atmosphere in Harrisburg is very open right now to the [open records] issue,” said Arneson. “The Senate majority leader and the governor have plans that aren’t too different, and House Speaker [Dennis] O’Brien wants to see reform. We’ve not had a situation in Pennsylvania before where three leaders at that level are uniting on, if not behind, the concept.”
That’s for sure – but we, the people, better keep our eye on this ball . . . because if our representatives are not “behind” the concept, it could be because their hearts aren’t really in it.
Good things are happening, but there is plenty of healthy skepticism among those who have long witnessed a political process in which amiable oratory too rarely gets translated into meaningful change.
“No matter what other reform gets passed, if we don’t pass this open records access, we’ll never get the public trust back,” Mahoney said.
“This is where reform starts.”
Amen.