Arrogant Contempt for Public

For two days running this week the House Budget Committee banned both the public and the press from its meeting room while it considered a 1986 deficit-reduction plan. Some stories describe this recourse to secrecy as unprecedented. Others use the word unusual. Unprecedented or unusual, what the Budget Committee did was unwarranted.

Except in very rare instances in which national security is at stake, Congress is not supposed to conduct the public’s business--which in this case means deciding how the public’s money is to be spent--hidden away from public scrutiny. A government that chooses not to operate in the open is a government that provokes suspicion and invites mistrust.

The secret meetings were for the political convenience of the committee’s members, nothing else. They provided the chance for the kind of horse-trading and compromises that, conducted in the light of day, might prove embarrassing or uncomfortable for those making them. There is nothing wrong with compromises; no legislative body in our society could get work done without them. There is a lot wrong with a legislative process that allows politicians to hide out in an effort to avoid accountability.

The Budget Committee has set a very troubling precedent, for its own future activities and for any other congressional committee that might choose to follow its example. Committees regularly mark up bills involving millions and even billions of dollars in potential gains or losses for particular industries, blocs or groups. Not all of these actions are necessarily wise, but at least the public can usually count on being able to see what’s going on and who is responsible. That is an essential right. In denying it, the House Budget Committee has demonstrated an arrogant contempt toward the public that it represents.