Survey shows support for open government
New Englanders value openness in government, yet are skeptical that public officials share that value. They believe that having open access to the workings of government is important to citizenship. Most favor toughening the laws that protect access, and most agree that journalists are on the front lines in that fight.
Moreover, nearly nine out of ten New Englanders believe government agencies that wrongly withhold public records should pay the legal bills necessary to open them.
Those were among the findings of a recent poll of attitudes toward the First Amendment commissioned by The New England First Amendment Coalition and conducted by the University of New Hampshire’s Survey Center.
Survey center pollsters asked more than 600 New Englanders their attitudes toward the First Amendment and transparency in government. The findings show skepticism about the willingness of public officials to operate in the open, and a concern about the lack of penalties for failing to do so.
Andrew Smith, director of UNH’s Survey Center, said the over arching significance of the poll lies in how highly citizens value openness in government and how skeptical they are that public officials share that value.
He points to the high percentage of respondents who believe open records laws should be strengthened (63 percent agree, 40 percent of those strongly) and the high number who believe officials who withhold information should have to pay a citizen’s legal bills to gain access.
Skepticism was widespread in the poll’s findings. For example, 44 percent of the respondents either strongly agreed or somewhat agreed that not “all public business” is done in public view. And 23 percent doubted that a public record would be surrendered in a timely manner. Only 27 percent believed state government does an excellent job of keeping records up to date and open to the public.
As governments throughout the region attempt to update their right to know laws for the digital age, the responses to the survey reinforce the notion that public access is valued by average citizens and not seen as an exclusive concern of the media.
Access in the Internet age would be much enhanced if government officials simply put more information online.
In some cases, they may lack the resources or technology to do so. The state courts, for example, have wanted to update computer systems to enhance public access for years, but have been denied funding.
In other cases, state and local governments could easily put a wealth of information online, but are often reluctant. They make a distinction between “public” and “accessible.”
A document may be public according to the law, but that doesn’t always mean it is accessible. Someone has to file a written request, go to the city hall or courthouse, await a reply, and often pay for photocopies. The same document available online is truly accessible.
Strengthening open record laws requires a mandate to post online any public information that can be posted at reasonable cost.
Meaningful penalties for violations are also necessary. Public officials who violate open meeting and right to know requirements are rarely challenged in court.
New Hampshire has in recent years tried to update its open meeting law by addressing the question of online communication by public officials. It’s time to advance that effort in the direction favored by the public – more records online and stiffer penalties for violations.
