How Do the Gubernatorial Candidates Stand on Open Government?

As the governor's race heads into the final weeks, there is still time to ask the candidates some important questions about openness and transparency in government.

Candidates always support openness-at first blush.  But when it comes to spending money on it or forcing people and companies that work for or with the government to be open, it is often a different story.

But make no mistake; open government starts at the top, with the governor, and they have a great deal of discretion to determine what the public can know about its government.

And with major issues like budget cuts, health care and taxes facing the next administration, there is no time like now for the people about to make these important decisions to commit "showing their work" as they go about the people's business.  We may want to know how and why leaders came to the decisions they made.

Personally, I have worked with former Senator Mark Dayton and Representative Tom Emmer on open government issues.  Tom Horner I have not, but his background as a reporter makes him aware of these issues.

Here's what anyone interested in open government should ask:

1. Do you think that the Minnesota Government Data Act effectively accomplishes the twin goals of  maximizing public access to government data and protecting citizens from governments improper collection and use of personal information?  If not, what changes would you propose to the law to make it effective?

2. In relation to Minnesota's government data and information, what does the term transparency mean to you?

3. Our current governor tells us that most e-mail records of his office are not official records and do not need to be retained.  If you are elected, will you take a similar position?  If not, what will be your approach to retention of records and data of the governor and the governor's office?

4. Do you believe that meetings with regulators, and other state agencies have with businesses ought to be subject to the open meeting law?

5. Will you pledge to make your calendar of appointments, meetings, and state related travel available for public inspection?

I wish to thank the Minnesota Coalition on Government Information for the original development of some of these questions.



   

Is Open Government Good For Your Health?

Freely available public information appears to be important for health plans of Minnesota. The Pioneer Press and the Star Tribune reported that a representative of the Minnesota Council of Health Plans used the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act to lobby for their interests with the Department of Human Services in Washington.

I think that is great.

I do find it ironic though that these same health plans lobby against public accountability and transparency about their operation of state-funded programs. They helped defeat bills that might reveal, for instance, how much they spend on administrative costs.

It is hard to imagine why citizens, or even legislators, should not be able to see and understand where their tax money is being spent. Why should it be a secret to see how the health plans are spending public monies on such programs as Medicaid? Our public programs currently managed by these health plans lack transparency and accountability.

Audits and reports are a key factor in assessing how well plans like Medica, Blue Cross/Blue Shield and Health Partners are taking care of us.

But the Minnesota Council of Health Plans disagrees. They recently fought bills in the Legislature that would have brought sunshine and more government oversight to their businesses.;

If we're going to give them tax dollars to take care of Minnesotans, we shouldn't allow vendors who receive  millions of dollars in public money to thwart the Data Practices Act.

I am glad the Minnesota Council of Health Plans have figured out to use the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act for their own benefit.  Now perhaps they will figure out how to comply with it for ours.

The Wal-Martization of the Minneapolis Public Library System

Today I went to a Hennepin County Library branch in Minneapolis.  I looked for the new book non-fiction section.  I went around twice where it had been in the past.  I could not find it.  I then asked the staff.  I was told new non-fiction are no longer displayed.  They are now placed in the regular book collection right away

I recently went to the Sumner branch.  Sumner had a strong collection of African American documentary and movie media which was part of the Gary Sudduth collection.  I was surprised at how small the collection was from the previous time I had been there.  I asked staff what happened.  They said that DVDs now "float".  That means if a dvd is taken out at one branch and returned to another it remains at the returning library.  Therefore the Sudduth Collection is torn apart.

At the downtown library I used to go on Saturdays and get 5-8 dvds consisting of documentaries, a couple of Hitchcock movies, and maybe a comedy with Bob Hope. The collection is now very thin and the choice is limited.  For non-fiction fans there is no one stop place for all the new stuff, either.

Bigger is not always better, there are some things that have been lost with the merger.  There have been changes in operation that have impacted the service and atmosphere of what the Minneapolis Library System was.

I will bet you the Hennepin County Commissioners know nothing of the various operational changes and their negative impacts, but avid users of the libraries in Minneapolis sure do.

Who own's Minnesota's e-mail, Microsoft or you.?

The St. Paul Pioneer Press reported that the State of Minnesota has signed an agreement with Microsoft to be the storage hub for its e-mail, instant messaging, among other kinds of services.  The service is called "clouding", or in other words a third party serving as a repository for the state's email, etc. with some added attractions.

The press release by the Minnesota Office of Technology praises the agreement with lowering costs and improved security.  How is my e-mail to the Governor or someone else in the government going to be more secure?  Who owns the information now that it is in the hands of a third party?  Where is the location of the data? The old motto of I keep and control the stuff then I know it is safe, secure, and accessible may no  longer apply with aspects of our states data.

Will this improve my ability to get quick and easy access to public government records next time I want to find out what a State Commissioner or a Governor is doing on an issue, or how a policy was developed? Or is this one more barrier for the citizen?

OH Really!

This weekend a person asked me if she had a right to material about her that a work supervisor was referencing to her about.  She explained to me what it was and I said yes.  I said there is state law that allow employees access to their personnel files.  Her comment was, Oh Really!   The state law is Minnesota Chapter 181.960 to 181.966.

Many people are unaware of their legal and statutory rights.  How can people be notified of their rights?  Is it up to the individual to find out or should the employer let her know in the above scenario?  Notification of rights is an important concept if people are going to be aware of them and to be able to use them.

Many government agencies will put on their web sites the statutory rights they enforce and some description of the law. I decided to visit the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry website to see if their is a reference to the personnel law that by law they enforce.  Low and behold there is not.  I put in a call to the supervisor of that enforcing unit to let her know about the omission.  When the person calls back and I tell them about my website experience, will they say , "Oh Really".

War Protesters, Supreme Court, and The First Amendment .

In June of this year the U.S. Supreme Court decided a case that many people in Minnesota may know nothing about.  At the core of the case is what is "material support to terrorism" and does it affect the First Amendment rights of U. S. citizens.  The events that happened today in Minneapolis by the FBI raid may be a catalyst for us to find out. The FBI searched the homes of individuals for evidence of material support to terrorism.

The Court decided by 6-3 vote that it is not a violation of First Amendment rights to arrest and convict people of giving certain kinds of material support to terrorists. The Court upheld the part of federal statute that was in question.  The case is Holder v  Humanitarian Law.

To take a little liberty with the last couple of sentences in the dissent of the case,  it should be asked,  Are these people in Minneapolis being deprived of the protection that the First Amendment demands?

Who is on the List? And who is not?

From my previous post on August 7th I talked about how a legislative created work group is meeting at the BCA to  discuss how law enforcement should collect and use information on their citizens for intelligence purposes.

To the credit of the group they have decided that it will comply with the open meeting law.  This means it is open to the public.  It was their third meeting today.  Law enforcement agencies made presentations on how they collect and use intelligence information.  It became quite clear that law enforcement agencies may soon be collecting information on citizens at an unprecedented level.

On October 13th, there will be presentations by such groups as the public defenders, community groups, and the Minnesota  ACLU.  The following meeting they will begin to discuss what they should recommend to the legislature.  There will be an opportunity for the public to weigh in on the recommendations.

All agendas, minutes, documents, etc, and audio of the meetings are at the BCA website.