Harvard Law professor and good government advocate Lawrence Lessig makes an interesting argument in the New Republic that too much transparency in government could, in some instances, be a bad thing. He's sparked quite a debate.
As government watchdog groups and news organizations get better, for instance, at combining data about campaign contributions with individual politician's votes on legislation, so anyone can see at a glance possible connections, does it unfairly stain the politicians or the system itself? Could it only produce more cynicism?
Or do we just trust readers to have enough sense and let them make up their own minds with whatever information that's available?
This blog brought to you by the Sun-Times editorial board (click on names to read bios):
Stop looking for ways to CONTINUE to HAVE GOVERNMENT hide. THE TAX PAYERS NEED TO KNOW everything about politicians when it comes to WHO THEY KNOW.
For TOO MANY years these parasites have been lying, cheating, sneaking and one by one have been USING TAX PAYERS MONEY as if it was their OWN. They get into office and its a GIVEN that corruption will follow. JUST LOOK AT THE NEWS, everyone conected withj a politcian has something CORRUPT GOING ON. It has finally come to light and instead of DIMMING THE BULD, lets increase the wattage.
We should know everyone that POLITICIANS are in contact with, (WE DON'T CARE ABOUT THEIR PERSONAL LIVES) WE WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THEIR POLITICAL CONNECTIONS from DOG CATCHERS to THE HIGHEST OFFICE. NO ON SHOULD BE LEFT OUT, NO ONE
Take it easy Cookie. The Sun-Times is just throwing it out there now since they have a majority of their liberal buddies holding office in both state and federal positions. They realize that the transparency issue that they screamed and whined about to no end when the Republican's held office cannot be applied equally to their pals. If it were, they would definitely not be re-elected and then, heaven-forbid, they would have to live with more conservatives. BTW, sorry for the heaven reference. For you libs, that's a place that those of us who still have faith believe we will go in the after-life...but only if we live well.
less government is better
WELCOME TO CAPONELAND! DID YOU EVER REALLY THINK CHICAGO WOULD TRANSFORM ITSELF? SILLY PEONS! THEY TAKE YOUR MONEY, PRETEND TO HELP THE POOR (I GREW UP IN CABRINI GREEN) AND PASS IT TO THE REZCO'S OF THE WORLD. I GOT AN EDUCATION, (NO THANKS TO COMMUNITY ORGS WHICH ALMOST HAD ME CONVINCED I WAS TOO VICTIMIZED TO ACHIEVE). I GREW MY BUSINESS AND MOVED IT TO TEXAS WHERE THE BUSINESS CLIMATE WAS MUCH LESS HOSTILE. I WENT FROM 4 EMPLOYEES TO 247 IN 22 MONTHS. I COULD NEVER HAVE GROWN LIKE THAT IN CAPONE/DALYLAND. ENJOY YOUR WINTER OF DISCONTENT. DETROIT ISN'T FAR AWAY, KINDRED SOULS I GUESS. SILLY IDIOTS ALL THE WAY AROUND
There is no need to worry about transparency in government. Right now there isn't any. All the bs about being opened this administration has been disingenuous and outright liars when it comes to openness. The health debate has all been kept behind close doors. Not even Republicans invited so forget about bipartisanship on any laws now. Passing massive amounts of debt to future generations and no one knows what is on the bills that we are all footing. America what a great place it used to be.
As government watchdog groups and news organizations get better, for instance, at combining data about campaign contributions with individual politician's votes uggs outlet storeon legislation, so anyone can see at a glance possible connections, does it unfairly stain the politicians or the system itself? Could it only produce more cynicism?
Or do we just trust readers to have enough sense and let them make up their own minds with whatever information that's available?