I have some questions about the Legislature's closed rules committees. Lawmakers, is there a difference between your public and private answers?
What is it that is so scary about sifting bills in public? What is it about what your rules committees do in private that the public should not know? What would the public do if they knew it? Has it occurred to you that we are interested in how decisions are made on public policy? How would you feel if your employees told you to keep out of your company decisionmaking processes and made them secret?Are you posturing with constituents by submitting bills that you intend to kill? Do you hold politeness above honesty? In an open environment would you forward bills that should be killed to regular committees? Can you say no to inappropriate legislation proposed by a constituent? Would you be elected if it were known you would not or could not say no?
Is the majority party trying to maintain its power by closing the rules committees? How would today's majority party like to be the minority in this situation? How likely would it be that the rules committee would become open if today's minority became the majority? Where would today's majority be? Will the rules committee be open when that inevitably happens?
Jeffrey J. Mitchell
Orem