Usa new news

Opinion: The 2025 legislative session is first where lawmakers can discuss legislation in private. Good!

“Which is more realistic Scrubs or ER?” “Scrubs,” the hospital intern replied without hesitation; the wacky sitcom was more representative of her emergency room experience than the edgy medical drama. Why would she say that?

It’s probably for the same reason that I, a former congressional staffer, prefer the cartoon “I’m Just a Bill” by Schoolhouse Rock! to the political TV show “House of Cards,” the former is more realistic. Life on Capitol Hill is not Emmy-worthy.

Those who work there, members and staff, spend their days meeting with lobbyists and constituents, discussing legislation, and trying to seem important. Because Congress is not subject to open meetings laws, most member discussions, be they one-on-one or in groups, occur in private without press or public access.

Good thing too, without the opportunity to mug for the camera, members can be serious and even productive. Once a bill has been formally introduced it becomes public and all subsequent hearings, markups, floor speeches, and votes are just that, public with the cameras rolling.

In allowing legislative brainstorming and strategy meetings to be private, the public isn’t being denied an opportunity to see into the legislative machine. They’re being spared.

Same goes for the Colorado General Assembly, where I have also worked. The state legislature convened this week under the Gold Dome in Denver facing vastly different open meetings laws.

Thanks to legislation passed last year which updated the state’s 1972 open meetings law, only discussions regarding introduced legislation are open to the public. Discussions are exempt if they concern “matters that are by nature interpersonal, administrative, or logistical or that concern personnel, planning, process, training, or operations, [and] as long as the merits or substance of matters that are expressly defined as being public business are not discussed.”

Thanks to the new law, lawmakers can now meet one-on-one to discuss legislation that hasn’t been introduced yet and can meet in groups to brainstorm without the press.

The law passed with a strong majority of Democratic members voting aye. Republicans likely voted against it because they knew it would be an egg-on-face moment for their rivals. If Democrats were in the minority they would have voted against a similar Republican majority bill. Never waste an opportunity to appear morally superior to the other side of the aisle.

Naturally, public interest groups like the League of Women Voters of Colorado and the Independence Institute and members of the press expressed their frustration over what they consider secret policy negotiations.

During a December hearing, they said they believe the public is being denied the opportunity to hear how policies are being formulated behind the scenes. They were especially displeased when caucuses met privately before the August special session over property taxes. Many members of the press and multiple public interest groups would like to see the law repealed.

It won’t be nor should it be. The law strikes an appropriate balance between the public right to know and productive lawmaking.

Meetings are boring so they should not be public; is that what you’re saying? What kind of journalist are you? For starters, I’m not a journalist. I’m a commentator, the black ewe of the media family. I deeply admire reporters and the work they do, but some parts of lawmaking are more efficiently and effectively done without the cameras rolling.

Secondly, I’m a proponent of effective representative democracy and robust institutions. Populist schemes like term limits, which deprive the legislature of experience, and ballot initiatives, which circumvent vetting processes, obstruct representative democracy. Forbidding members to work together on legislation in private is no different.

In fact, Senate Bill 24-157 should have applied the same exclusion to city councils and other public bodies. We pay legislators to do a job. We need to give them the ability to do it effectively. When they fail, we can vote them out.

Krista L. Kafer is a weekly Denver Post columnist. Follow her on Twitter: @kristakafer.

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Exit mobile version