Idaho House Democrats are firmly committed to open caucuses.
Except when they aren't.
Democrats held their second closed caucus of the session Thursday, shutting out a reporter and two industry lobbyists while discussing the latest version of a possible transportation funding plan. House Democratic leaders still say they haven't changed their open-caucus policy, announced with considerable ballyhoo.
But two closed caucuses suggest a trend.
Minority Caucus Chairman James Ruchti of Pocatello told the Statesman's Dan Popkey that the Democrats agreed to hold begin discussing the plan in private, honoring a promise made to House Majority Leader Mike Moyle of Star.
You'd hope Moyle has more pressing matters on his agenda — on Day 102 of a far-too-long session — but he couldn't have done a better job of boxing in the Democrats. In order to have a look at House Republicans' plan, Democrats had to agree to bend their internal rules on open caucuses.
Say this for the Republicans' closed-door policy: It's wrong-headed and it invites suspicion of the prevailing caucus, but at least it's consistent. You may not like the rules (and I don't), but at least you know what they are.
The Democrats are walking into a trap of their own design. They're sending the signal that some topics can be discussed in the open, while others are too important to deal with in open caucus. That tends to trivialize their own open meetings. And it makes the Democrats look like they're making up their rules as they go — because they are.
Get Twitter updates on my blog and column and Statesman editorials.
Become a follower here. On Facebook, join the Idaho Statesman
Opinion Page Group for updates.
Delicious
Digg
Yahoo
"Occasionally"? Come on!
House Democrats have held two closed caucus meetings and dozens of open ones in 2009.
A more accurate headline would be "occasionally closed," but even that is a stretch ...
So beating your wife every day, rather than once or twice
a year earns your respect?
You are absolutely wrong on this one, and I hope you know that. I agree that the Idaho Democrats should say 'we will keep open as many meetings as possible'.
Open is better, but even I recognize that there are times when both Republicans and Democrats are going to want to caucus in private. That the Republicans consistently beat their wife, I mean, close their meetings, is not better than at least attempting to keep all meetings open even if that is not truly practical.
Poet, I cannot justify your metaphor. Please retract it.
----------
Beethoven was deaf when he wrote his Ninth Symphony. Rush Limbaugh is profoundly hard of hearing.
Millions of people like Beethoven.
Try changing your margins...
Justify left, or even center if you want.
Won't hurt me. I wear protection.
I have no margins, only a call. Take stock in that.
----------
Beethoven was deaf when he wrote his Ninth Symphony. Rush Limbaugh is profoundly hard of hearing.
Millions of people like Beethoven.
Reaching for low hanging fruit?
Looks like its time for yet another post on how the media has been co-opted by special interests, and when they do pay attention they waste time chasing their own pet interests, rather than doing any actual substantive investigation for the good of democracy. A few things omitted in this story like your personal and official role in advocating transparency in government. I agree with your position but perhaps disclosing this motive would be more journalistically honest if you were upfront about it. Maybe y'all could do a story ruminating on how the Democrats figure into the bloody solution. Now that would be something. Sheesh.
Good government is never TRANSPARENT...
It should always be very visible.
----------
Beethoven was deaf when he wrote his Ninth Symphony. Rush Limbaugh is profoundly hard of hearing.
Millions of people like Beethoven.