From the Carolina Journal (3/28/11): It stands to reason that when governmental bodies conduct the public's business, it ought to be done in public.
Only, public officials frequently come up with reasons not to.
It’s not hard to understand why. Open government is risky. During legislative deliberations, for example, lawmakers may ask dumb questions or lose their tempers. Publicity makes it harder to conduct and maintain the delicate negotiations sometimes necessary to enact bills, fashion budgets, or close deals. Some public records generated by government action contain sensitive information and could be misused.
But secretive government is also risky. Without the public looking over their shoulders, government officials sometimes may unwise decisions that impose significant costs on the liberty, property, and even lives of their citizens. Usually, these decisions are mistakes reflecting a lack of relevant information and due consideration. Rarely, but more dangerously, they contain the germ of corruption, of improper or illegal relationships between those who wield power and those who may derive private benefit from it.
The North Carolina House of Representatives is currently considering HB 87, a bill to authorize a public referendum on a state constitutional amendment to ensure sunshine in government. Its main purpose is to make it harder for future legislatures to weaken the state’s public-records and open-meetings laws, by requiring three-fifths of the General Assembly rather than a simple majority to do so.