ALEC's Grip on Government Slipping

I'd been reading about several giant corporate backers of a private nationwide organization - ALEC - which has been steadily writing legislation and getting states to pass them by having members of state legislators become 'board members' of ALEC - and that recently these huge companies are dropping their support for ALEC.

For one reason, thanks to online writers, the dirty details of what ALEC has been doing got told. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation dropped away from supporting ALEC, mainly due to Voter ID laws and the now-notorious Stand Your Ground law.

And the Foundation isn't alone - Kraft Foods, Pepsi, Coca-Cola, Intuit, McDonald's, Wendy's -- all have stopped the support and made sure the press and the online world knows it. It's good news, but it's quite telling that for many years, these companies have been working hard to increase their control of our cities and towns and our nation as a whole. Two of the best blog writers in Tennessee took up the story today:

R. Neal at KnoxViews: "State Reps. Curry Todd and Steve McDaniel are members of the illustrious ALEC Board of Directors, and Todd is ALEC's Tennessee state chairman. You may recall that Rep. Todd recently helped kill the "Influence Disclosure Act" that would would have required disclosing the source of astroturf legislation such as ALEC's."

Southern Beale: "But as ALEC and the Chamber wade into the weeds of extremist ideology, they’re alienating some of their biggest corporate supporters, whose profits depend on being a little less reactionary and appealing to a broad range of consumers."

ALEC, The American Legislative Exchange Council, is a hardcore conservative group, with more than 2,000 state legislators from all 50 states (about  one-third of all existing legislators), some 85 members of Congress and 14 sitting or previous governors. They've been steadily cranking out what they innocently call "model legislation". Pre-written and crafted for easy passage, these bills touch nearly every aspect of your life and of government and get handed out to members and they file the bills in state after state. As Neal pointed out, Rep. Curry killed a law to require legislators disclose how and who funds or writes legislation they present. ALEC demands secrecy, but the secret is finally out.

Repairing the damage done by a national, self-serving and deceptive campaign meant to erase each state's government will take too many years and hours -- and electing new legislators not yet addicted to the corporate trough. As of now, ALEC will fight to keep the power they've taken - and they'll seek other ways to move and act in secret by forming new groups with new names not yet tarnished with deception.

Bringing The Cinnamon Challenge To Government

Each year thousands of new bills get submitted to the state and federal legislatures, with little to slow their apparently infinite growth. Outrage has been hot on the heels of many bills, as claims are made that they emerge from faceless bloated lobbyists and organizations whose true goals seem impossible to define.

And, more and more, these bills define regulations over every aspect of our lives, often demanding that citizens of our great nation and/or state must perform various tasks prior to attaining approvals, benefits, licenses, etc etc.

But what task do we, as citizens, require of our representatives before they submit a bill, whether it was given to them to submit or they crafted it all by themselves? Wouldn't it be a good idea to demand some kind of proof of personal sacrifice or commitment?

Well, I have a suggestion.

I happened across a semi-popular bit of behavior which I think we should adopt as a requirement before any bill could be submitted - it's called The Cinnamon Challenge.

This challenge began to appear online in 2001, and videos soon followed.

The Cinnamon Challenge: a person must consume one tablespoon of cinnamon without spitting it out or vomiting. If a representative can do this, then their bill can then be submitted and undergo the usual process of approval or rejection. I would also add that every attempt at mastering the Challenge be videotaped and uploaded to YouTube. In fact, Illinois Governor Pat Quinn recently took the challenge and passed it just fine - so it is not impossible to master this challenge ... or is it?

Here's a sample of videos of average American folks attempting the challenge:

A semi-popular comedienne named GloZell recently tried it (with appropriately wacky results):

So there's my idea - fail the Cinnamon Challenge and your bill fails. Pass it, and then the legislature can consider the bill. I'm betting it would reduce needless bill activity by a significant margin. For those that succeed, we have proof the representative really, truly cares about the legislation.

It's a win-win.

Rep. Casada Wants Local Government to Meet in Secret Sessions

Rep. Glen Casada

I can't quite believe I have to write this post, reminding our elected officials that secret government meetings are illegal for a reason. Yet, here we are.

State Rep. Glen Casada and the Tennessee County Commissioners Association want elected officials to hold secret meetings. Rep. Casada is planning to offer new legislation which would make secret government meetings legal - a move he has to make since currently it is against the law.

There exists no reason for the change to secret meetings - other than denying public awareness, public participation and to demolish the way our democracy works.

As an editorial in the Jackson Sun noted:

"The actions of local government have a direct affect on the people who live in those jurisdictions. Local bodies set tax rates, create and enforce local laws, fund public education and other public services such as libraries, set policies for public school systems, appoint local boards and commissions, recommend and hire local public officials and set local government budgets. 

At no other level of government is public official accountability more important. While great attention is paid to state and federal government meetings, local public body meetings often are poorly attended by the public, and sometimes even by local media watchdogs. Keeping such meetings open and requiring public bodies to post public notices of meetings is the last defense the public has to ensuring its business is done in the open."

It's shameful enough already the state legislature does not have to follow the laws requiring open meetings. Rep. Casada and the TCCA must have something they want to hide - to allow them to do so will not end well.

Surveillance Cams Turning U.S. Into Santa's Naughty-or-Nice Indicator?

Nationwide - and here in Tennessee - we've been watched and we are going to be watched even more in coming years, with a near-constant observation of everyone.

"The story also details Memphis cops using military equipment to find license plates with warrants attached to the owners; a citizen taking pictures of a local police boat in California triggering an FBI datamining frenzy; local law enforcement officials instructed that "Most Muslims in the United States want to impose sharia law here"; and loads of vague useless scary reports tossed down to locals by federal DHS, and locals targeting lawful and harmless gatherings for intelligence fearmongering.

The Post story also explains what local "fusion centers" do with federal terror money in a land decidedly bereft of terror:

The fact that there has not been much terrorism to worry about is not evident on the Tennessee fusion center's Web site. Click on the incident map, and the state appears to be under attack.

Red icons of explosions dot Tennessee, along with blinking exclamation marks and flashing skulls. The map is labeled: "Terrorism Events and Other Suspicious Activity.

But if you roll over the icons, the explanations that pop up have nothing to do with major terrorist plots: "Johnson City police are investigating three 'bottle bombs' found at homes over the past three days," one description read recently. ". . . The explosives were made from plastic bottles with something inside that reacted chemically and caused the bottles to burst."

Another told a similar story: "The Scott County Courthouse is currently under evacuation after a bomb threat was called in Friday morning. Update: Authorities completed their sweep . . . and have called off the evacuation."

"Watch Everyone!" certainly appears to be the fearful policy guiding security in private and public business. I wonder if the following tale became a notation on the "anti-terror" networks:

"A Mid-South man was arrested after police said he broke into a Jackson, Tennessee school and danced in the nude early Tuesday morning.

Lt. Tyreece Miller with the Jackson Police Department said Dakotah Lamuska broke a window at Northeast Middle School. His nude dance was caught on surveillance camera.

"What it shows is a white man dancing in the nude," said Miller.

Miller said Lamuska started dancing for no apparent reason. He did not take anything from the school or destroy anything other than the window.

Jackson Police would not release the surveillance video of Lamuska dancing."

Well good, really, I don't wanna see it. But the suspect here seems guilty at best of breaking and entering with the added action of skinny dipping without anything to dip in.

Perhaps our safety does depend on us all being watched and recorded all the time whatever we do and wherever we go. But I'm not convinced yet.

And what about "watching the watchmen"? Congress surely does not abide for more than a very limited peek at what they are doing:

"House floor debates are currently televised by cameras owned, operated, and controlled by the House. Reaction shots and wide shots of the chamber are not permitted under House rules. C-SPAN, as well as other media outlets, must use the floor feed provided by the House in its coverage. Congressional policy does allow for C-SPAN's coverage of other Congressional events, such as committee hearings, press conferences, speeches, and the like, to be produced by its own cameras. C-SPAN argues that allowing its cameras to be installed in the House chamber would give the public a more complete and transparent view of Congressional debates. If granted permission to install cameras, C-SPAN proposes to make its feed available to accredited media and stream it live on its web site."

UPDATE: Tennessee "fusion centers" say Free Speech is suspicious activity.

Smackdown On Public Records Is Public Loss

A new fee schedule means a sliding scale will be used to charge you to view and/or copy public records, thanks to a decision from the state. It's a leap backward, away from open government and a tactic of sheer intimidation which is an embarrassment for the state.

The KNS reports:

"The hourly rate will depend on the salary of the person doing the search. For example, a search would cost $20 per hour if the government worker processing the request earns $39,000 a year.

The decision may surprise members of an advisory committee that met to discuss fees for records searches. Open government advocates had called for at least three hours of search time before labor costs kicked in, while Chad Jenkins of the Tennessee Municipal League had indicated he would settle for two hours."

So in addition to paying the salaries of public officials, you'll pay even more by requiring them to perform their duties and provide access to records if it takes them more than an hour to fill your request. Bets on what the minimum time will be now to search records and/or make copies?

A problem some officials claim exists is that occasionally, a person will constantly demand more and more information and records requests, which officials see as a way to harass some office or agency. So, the idea, apparently, is to charge EVERY CITIZEN more money. Brilliant.

A far more common sense approach might have been to set fees on making copies/searching records based on the number of requests or copies being made on a person-by-person basis. But no - this is just digging deeper into your pockets if you seek information. We charge you more if you ask questions now.

An office can waive all fees if they wish. And pigs might fly if you throw one hard enough.

State To OK More Fees For Open Records

A couple of headlines today claim the Voice of the Public was heeded regarding charging fees to access public records in Tennessee -- sounds like a win, doesn't it?

It isn't.

You will be charged for any requests for copies you seek according to "new statewide guidelines." Costs range from 20 to 50 cents per copy.

And you'll also be charged additional fees on a by-the-hour basis if your requests takes more than two hours to fill that request. Wanna bet how many hours that request of yours will take to fill? Two hours, minimum/ Probably more.

"It's better than nothing," said Frank Gibson of the Tennessee Coalition for Open Government. Yeah and not getting a stick in the eye is better than getting a stick in the eye.

So maybe I need to adopt some new guidelines too - anytime a business or agency requests to see a copy of any of my IDs or any other of the various forms requested by officials -- you'll have to pay me a dollar just to see it. Want to make a copy of it? That will be $10. In a shrinking economy, the time you are making me spend to fill your request is time lost from valuable work.

Act Now To Halt New Fees For Public Record Access

The state is creating a whole new fee system for anyone who seeks access to public records, and even though the public can offer comments on this new proposal, you only have until noon Thursday to do so. Many thanks to R. Neal for pointing this out on his blog:

"Dorothy Bowles, U.T. Professor and member of the East Tennessee Society of Professional Journalists, alerts us to a proposal that would make it more difficult and expensive for citizens and journalists to access public records.

The deadline for public comment, which was only announced this week, is noon tomorrow (Thursday) and the hearing is on Friday. You can submit your comments here: open.records@state.tn.us

She explains more ...

From Dorothy Bowles:

As you know, the recently enacted TN Open Records Act established a legal counsel's office to set fees for record requests in an attempt to have some consistency across the state.

Unfortunately, the statute allows for BOTH copying costs and labor costs.

The statute also established an Advisory Committee on Open Government, and I was appointed one of the members of that committee.

FRIDAY (yes, day after tomorrow) a public hearing will take place on a proposal that was only this week distributed by the legal counsel's office. Written comments will be accepted through NOON tomorrow.

Written comments can be submitted via e-mail to open.records@state.tn.us

I will attend the hearing and do everything I can to have open records without huge fees. But I expect that records custodians and their bosses across the state will storm the hearing. After all, it's part of their regular workday, whereas citizens would have to take a day off work to attend.

We need folks who believe that the taxpayers own public records and should be able to examine them to send comments to Nashville, but time is short."

I'm going to summarize what my email will say - and I really encourage you to sound off on this too. It is truly a now or never situation.

On The Topic of New Fees For Public Records:

First let me say this opportunity needs to be set at a time AFTER the public has had adequate notice. I do my best to stay informed on this topic and still have only a few hours to respond. This is reprehensible and certainly appears that the goal is to eliminate and not encourage public participation.

However, since any postponement is highly unlikely, I write to encourage you to set any fees at a very lowest level.

Public agencies and officials are already earning salaries drawn from taxation for their labor. While a fee for making copies of records might be defensible (again a nominal fee) to add even more costs is ultimately a method of repelling the public from gaining information about their own government. This is nothing short of a new Tax On Information. Agencies will not be creating new records, simply providing copies of existing information. To consider it otherwise is simply wrong and at worst is an attempt to quell any search for public information.

The state already has a very poor history responding to the previous laws covering access to public records. The state already ranks near the very bottom for access to public records. Many of the case by case examples as well as audits of agencies which supply this information are available via the Tennessee Coalition for Open Government website and I encourage this panel to review that information. In a nutshell, compliance with existing laws hovers around 65%.

Adding new costs for information requests will again be a deterrent not an enhancement.

Already, the individual must bear the costs of challenging violations of the public records and meeting laws. A state official might face a fine of $50 for violating this law, but only if a member of the public pursues the matter. Adding fees for copying records and for the "labor" could easily cost a resident much more than than $50.

I'm afraid I see no reason to create new costs for a system that currently barely works. And even if state agencies responded to requests for information at least 90% of the time, it is work already covered by their existing duties, not some unheralded new task forced upon them.

In short, I strongly oppose new fees for access to public records and hope this panel will discover ways to enhance compliance with the law by state agencies and not burden the residents with higher costs, and will encourage more education for state officials in offices requiring these records be provided, and will help foster a more transparent and accountable public service sector.

Secrecy, Gifts Ok'd For Sullivan Commission

A staggering endorsement of secrecy and influence peddling got the green light this week in upper East Tennessee government. Existing Open Meetings law was snubbed and a dubious Ethics Policy was embraced by the Sullivan County Commission in their last meeting.

The governing body first approved an odd change to their Ethics Policy, wherein a subjective test by the elected or appointed government official will determine if a gift creates any conflict. Sullivan County Attorney Dan Street said the policy is based entirely on a gift receiver's opinion:

"One commissioner offered the following description of the new policy’s approach to gifts, and no one said he was wrong: “An individual still makes the decision based on their own standards.”

Street said the policy would be hard to enforce with such a subjective measure.

“You could have someone receive a $10,000 car and stand right in front of you and say it didn’t influence them,” Street said."

As if an elected official would report receiving a gift which made them alter their votes or actions. This terrible idea gets adopted as legal policy??

The commission also approved a resolution supporting less oversight of officials and more chances for larger numbers of office holders to meet secretly to debate and decide on policy.

"[The Commission voted to] say Sullivan County supports changing the law so that members of any elected body could meet and talk about public policy in private as long as there is no quorum present. A quorum of the 24-member Sullivan County Commission, for example, is a simple a majority, or 13 members. The commission’s committees — which now meet in public, monthly — have only eight members each."

UPDATE: Here's an idea from Taxing Tennessee -- Using Sullivan County Commission's logic "it is quite appropriate to allow taxpayers to decide if their taxes are too high or too low."

Official Confesses Crime

In a surprisingly candid moment, an elected county commissoner in Dyer County spoke about how the county government has been operating:

"So you mean to tell me we've been breaking the law all these years?" asked Walker.

"Yes, we've broken the law in the past as it stands now," said Hill.

"I don't know how any legislation got passed with that," said Walker. "It's happened because of a whole lot of discussion on the telephone and between people."

The commission then voted to support "diluting" the state law, to allow for officials to meet and decide public policy in secret and without public notice.

Why the sudden concern?

After all, these commissioners (and those who elect them) think that an admission of being guilty of a crime is acceptable if an elected official makes the admission in a public meeting.

The Public's Right to Know

Despite intentions of some in the state's government, proposed changes in the laws on doing business in public remain snarled and confusing to the public at large, and threaten to push more business and policy decisions into back rooms. School boards are also seeking exemptions to the public meeting laws.

It's one of those important situations wherein the ramifications of the changes may not be immediately apparent, but one day down the line the public will discover their input and oversight into governmental operations has been shut down.

Make no mistake -- citizens need to pay heed to this proposal now before it is too late.

Bloggers and newspapers in the state are keeping a close watch on this issue:

- A KNS editorial warns against weaker laws

- Other bloggers offer comment

- A discussion between online writers

Some fine news which I had missed is that Hamblen County government has now placed minutes of their county commission meetings online. Blogger Linda Noe has all the details on how to access the information and navigate through it. Kudos to the county for this effort to provide information!

Another good resource for tracking how well or how poorly Tennessee governmental bodies provide public records and access to information is available at the Tennessee Coalition for Open Government.