House Republicans are furious at the DPVA for videotaping their committee meetings, saying that the DPVA’s excerpts are chosen on a partisan basis, and that it would be best for them to show the video unedited. A solution was offered by Del. Steve Landes (R-Augusta), in the form of HR45, which proposed that the House run a one-year pilot project of broadcasting their sessions. That way it would be nonpartisan, and precisely what House Republicans claim what they want.
Of course, House Republicans are lying. They don’t want any video of anything that they do. They made that crystal clear today when the Republican majority of the House Rules Committee rejected Landes’ bill. Here, for irony’s sake, is the video, courtesy of the DPVA.
It’s shameful, of course, but it’s good, at least for Democrats. House Republicans are creating their legacy. In this, their declining days in their brief dominance of their chamber, they are defining what they will be remembered for: secrecy and hypocrisy. Keep up the good work, guys.
What is even more ironic is that Mr. Landes voted against HR48.
Waldo, there’s enough hypocrisy in both parties without it being a legacy owned by one.
Republican-Americans don’t want us to know what they’re up to in the State Legislature. That’s embarassing. Good for DPVA for holding their feet to the fire.
There was actually a decent argument made by someone (I think it was the Chairman of the Rules Cmte.) against videotaping the proceedings and that was that people, esp. politicians, are more prone to grandstanding and verbosity when they’re aware they’re being filmed. I have some sympathy for this argument.
However, it fails to address the issue of why the committee votes can’t be recorded by a secretary and made public immediately.
Judge Smails,
Who actually watches CSPAN? By which I mean to illustrate that massive numbers of voters aren’t sitting there watching what goes on all day long. Grandstanding for the camera probably wouldn’t get a legislator anywhere unless it’s a particularly major piece of legislation and a particularly biting or insightful comment being made about it, in which case plenty of reporters will be there to hear it anyway.
@Jack: Yes, but the presence of a camera does change behavior. Id doesn’t matter if anyone is actually watching.
@Judge Smails: I hear you, and I think that is a valid point, but I would like to note that having a camera pointed at you can be very sobering as well.
The whole point is to make a record of the GA actions. They are there to represent the people and there must be a way to keep accountability and integrity. When i can’t go back and check on my representive, what kind of government is that?
Tony Lippa sheriff of Caroline County has the best slogan ever for politics.
Leadership
Integrity
Pride
Professionalism
Accountability
Holy mackerel, did you adopt that as a result of the diary on Daily Kos yesterday, or are you just giving it a test drive? Either way, that was quick!
Can’t wait to see if Republicans whine about this as much as the Democrats whine about “Democrat Party.” :D
Then Republicans should stop trying to hog the hypocrisy spotlight. :) They’re doing a pretty good job of it.
Waldo, air’s kinda thin out west, isn’t it? Been watching the news today. Looks like one of your candidates for president just had a nice macaca-moment. Will you be asking him to resign his position as Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee? How about step-down as a Senator?
Yea. Thought not.
Or like John Kerry with the troops (and unlike Trent Lott w/ Strom) do you just “know what he meant to say?”
Huh?
Step down? Resign? Have you ever known me to ask anybody to resign any position? What in the world does this have to do with House Republicans opposing having their votes on the record?
I’m baffled.
–…politicians, are more prone to grandstanding and verbosity when they’re aware they’re being filmed…–
I’m sorry guys – I think this argument against videoing the HOD is absolutely ludicrous, embarassing even! The Senate has had video broadcast of their sessions available to the public for a few years now with no problems (as far as I know). Basically, the argument made by the HOD (GOP, mostly) is that they are too immature for primetime – in which case they shouldn’t be holding elective office in the first place. I’m amazed that they can’t see how their argument against videotaping is actually strengthening the argument FOR it, as far as I’m concerned.