Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

  • Shop
  • Subscribe to BMG
  • Contact
  • Log In
  • Front Page
  • All Posts
  • About
  • Rules
  • Events
  • Register on BMG

Foiled! Letters Blogatory Turned Away At The Statehouse [updated]

July 6, 2011 By tedf

Cross-posted from Letters Blogatory.

There was a hearing today before the Joint Committee on the Judiciary of the Massachusetts legislature regarding the Uniform Foreign Court Money Judgment Act, which Massachusetts may adopt. The bill was introduced at the start of the current legislative session. I couldn’t attend the hearing, so I called the Committee’s offices to ask whether I could have a copy of the testimony. Here’s a summary of my phone call with a staffer.

Question: Can I have a copy of the testimony?

Answer: There is no video, and the testimony is not transcribed.

Question: Did witnesses provide prepared remarks in advance of the hearing?

Answer: Yes.

Question: Can I get a copy of those?

Answer: No.

Question: Why not?

Answer: They are not within the scope of the Massachusetts Public Records Law (our equivalent of the Freedom of Information Act).

Question (to myself, not to the staffer): So what? Just because you don’t have to give me copies doesn’t mean you can’t.

Question (to the staffer): Can I get a list of the witnesses who testified?

Answer: No.

This is ridiculous. I hope those of you who live in Massachusetts will take a minute to call your representatives and senators and tell them that legislative committees should work transparently. It’s as though this hearing dropped down the memory hole.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0
0

Filed Under: User Tagged With: legislature, massachusetts-public-records-law, public-records

Comments

  1. tedf says

    July 6, 2011 at 6:05 pm

    David, in response to your question: I called the House office of the Joint Committee on the Judiciary and spoke with some staff person, whom I think of as Dr. No.

    • David says

      July 6, 2011 at 8:09 pm

      I’ll email them. Will update if/when I hear anything back.

      • tedf says

        July 6, 2011 at 8:14 pm

        Thanks, David. I’m on the warpath. I also wrote my own Rep and Senator.

  2. David Whelan says

    July 6, 2011 at 6:36 pm

    Cynthia Stone Creem
    Gale D. Candaras
    Patricia D. Jehlen
    Thomas M. McGeeJohn F. Keenan
    Richard J. Ross
    Eugene L. O’Flaherty
    Christopher N. Speranzo
    Colleen M. Garry
    Kevin J. Murphy
    Sean Curran
    John V. Fernandes
    Angelo J. Puppolo, Jr.
    Carlos Henriquez
    Christopher M. Markey
    Daniel B. Winslow
    Shelia C. Harrington

    The Joint Committee on the Judiciary

    It shall be the duty of the committee on Judiciary to consider all matters concerning crimes, penalties and sentencing, criminal offender record information, judiciary, including the recall of judges, the salaries of judges, court clerks and court officers of the various courts, probation officers, juries and jury duty, parole, registers of deeds, correction issues previously sent to Public Safety (but excluding the retirement of judges and all other court personnel) and such other matters as may be referred. .

  3. AmberPaw says

    July 6, 2011 at 7:49 pm

    Sometimes a free lance videographer shows up and uses a digicam – I wasn’t at this hearing so do not know. Generally, each member of a committee gets a copy of each submission but not always, so TedF may want to inquire of BMG’s own Dan Winslow.

    There is ZERO transparency required of our legislature; it is noblesse oblige and up to each legislator and/or committee chair whether to arrange to have digital recording or give out copies of testimony.

  4. Ryan says

    July 6, 2011 at 8:04 pm

    Call your own representative and/or Senator, tell them what happened, and ask them to have the Joint Committee on the Judiciary send you the info. You may have to pay for any of the copies, and if you want them, you should say you’re willing to do that.

    If you’re calling the Joint Office, not your own Rep, whoever is picking up the phone isn’t incentivized to work with you in anywhere near the same way your own rep would be.

    This is a perfect example of why we need more and better transparency, including an open meetings law for the State House and ensuring that all public documents get put online (though part of me thinks getting all written testimony online would be a tall order — though that should absolutely be publicly available to anyone willing to get it/pay for it).

    • tedf says

      July 6, 2011 at 8:10 pm

      Ryan, the first thing I did was fire off a letter to my representatives. Senator Rush, Representative Scaccia, are you listening? Action, please!

  5. merrimackguy says

    July 7, 2011 at 9:27 am

    The Legislators are elected to do the work. Why do we need to know anything in between elections? Transparency just gets people agitated.

    • tedf says

      July 7, 2011 at 10:16 am

      The funny thing about this is that there can’t be more than five people interested in this bill. So if they hold their cards this close to the vest on a bill that no one knows or cares about, what are they doing on bigger-ticket issues?

  6. Christopher says

    July 7, 2011 at 10:27 am

    …then there shouldn’t be any more harm in making what was said in public available to those who couldn’t make it. It might be reasonable to redact names from the written record if privacy is a concern.

    • dont-get-cute says

      July 7, 2011 at 1:10 pm

      When someone goes to trouble of going to a hearing and making a statement, they want to make sure it gets heard! They don’t want two members of the committee nodding their heads for a minute and then their testimony being immediately erased as if it was never given, they want the whole state to know what they said, on the record, forever. Of course that’s what we want that’s why we testified at a public hearing!!!

      Of course if someone is concerned about their privacy and wants to make a private appeal, they can do that in some other way, and make it clear that it is not intended to be public.

      It’s clear they are not only being lazy slobs, but they want to be unaccountable lazy slobs as well.

  7. David says

    July 7, 2011 at 10:42 am

    I responded to Rep. O’Flaherty’s email this morning as follows, and I will update if/when he writes back.

    Dear Rep. O’Flaherty:

    Thank you very much for your response. I can certainly appreciate that
    your committee considers some very sensitive issues (though I do wonder
    whether the Uniform Foreign Court Money Judgment Act is among them).
    But surely even in those instances, the witnesses are aware that the
    hearing room may be filled with spectators, reporters, etc., and that
    their identities, along with anything they say, may well end up on the
    front page of the newspaper or leading the evening news. In fact, it
    seems to me that the more sensitive the issue, the more likely that the
    news media will be in attendance. It is precisely the high-profile
    issues like laws regarding sexual assault, and dramatic changes to
    intellectual property laws, that generate news stories. Just last
    month, for example, a hearing on the transgender rights bill was held in
    Gardner Auditorium because of the intense public interest in that bill,
    and generated numerous news stories. And according to a June 9 Globe
    story, one of the witnesses made precisely the point I am making: ”
    ‘Most of us work really hard to be invisible in society,’ said Gunner
    Scott, director of the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition,
    who now has a male identity. ‘Unfortunately, most of us have no choice
    but to come out of the closet.’ ” We can all certainly be grateful to
    such witnesses, who choose to testify despite the loss of privacy that
    doing so entails. But the simple fact is that they have already made
    the decision to “go public,” as it were, with their concerns about
    pending legislation.

    And so, it seems to me that witnesses who choose to testify have already
    themselves weighed the costs and benefits of doing so, and have decided
    that the opportunity to influence pending legislation is more important
    to them than keeping their identities hidden. To impose a blanket
    policy of refusing to give out information that was apparent to anyone
    in attendance seems to me to afford little additional protection to
    witnesses, while also unnecessarily penalizing persons with a genuine
    and legitimate interest in the subject matter, but who for reasons
    beyond their control are simply not able to attend on the day and time
    set by the committee. At the very least, I would think that the default
    position should be that the basic information we are discussing would be
    publicly available, and that the committee might in unusual cases choose
    to alter that position.

    I hope that you will reconsider.

    Best wishes,
    David

  8. tedf says

    July 7, 2011 at 10:59 am

    I’ve responded to Rep. O’Flaherty in a new post. Suffice it to say that I think his response is woefully wrongheaded.

  9. tedf says

    July 7, 2011 at 2:06 pm

    Representative O’Flaherty and I have exchanged emails on this issue, which I’ve posted here. The bottom line is he thinks the current policy is just fine, thank you very much.

Recommended Posts

  • No posts liked yet.

Recent User Posts

Predictions Open Thread

December 22, 2022 By jconway

This is why I love Joe Biden

December 21, 2022 By fredrichlariccia

Garland’s Word

December 19, 2022 By terrymcginty

Some Parting Thoughts

December 19, 2022 By jconway

Beware the latest grift

December 16, 2022 By fredrichlariccia

Thank you, Blue Mass Group!

December 15, 2022 By methuenprogressive

Recent Comments

  • blueeyes on Beware the latest griftSo where to, then??
  • Christopher on Some Parting ThoughtsI've enjoyed our discussions as well (but we have yet to…
  • Christopher on Beware the latest griftI can't imagine anyone of our ilk not already on Twitter…
  • blueeyes on Beware the latest griftI will miss this site. Where are people going? Twitter?…
  • chrismatth on This site (will be disabled on) December 31, 2022I joined BMG late - 13 years ago next month and three da…
  • SomervilleTom on Geopolitics of FusionEVERY un-designed, un-built, and un-tested technology is…
  • Charley on the MTA on This site (will be disabled on) December 31, 2022That’s a great idea, and I’ll be there on Sunday. It’s a…

Archive

@bluemassgroup on Twitter

#mapoli

incorruptibl_ma IncorruptibleMass @incorruptibl_ma ·
54m

A peak of this weeks’ episode on creating change and gathering power, featuring Jordan Berg Powers. Listen to more at http://tinyurl.com/IncorruptiblesS5E6!

#podcast #mapoli #bospoli #progressive

Reply on Twitter 1642281778403524610 Retweet on Twitter 1642281778403524610 Like on Twitter 1642281778403524610 Twitter 1642281778403524610
hannaswit Hanna Switlekowski @hannaswit ·
60m

That’s how I first got truly inspired into the #mapoli world, when I played the role of my state rep back in 2008….then came full circle working for him as I began my career!😀

Kim Driscoll @MassLtGov

Student Government Day is usually a day of firsts – first time in the State House, first time meeting your legislators, first peek at how a bill becomes law.

And it's just the beginning for these students. Before we know it, they'll be back in these seats making laws for real!

Reply on Twitter 1642280173793058816 Retweet on Twitter 1642280173793058816 Like on Twitter 1642280173793058816 3 Twitter 1642280173793058816
b87fm Boston 87.7 FM @b87fm ·
2h

💬Don't Miss Da #1 LatinX Comic Da World #AidaRodriguez THIS Thursday 7AM to 11AM with @NotoriousVOG🔥

»»LISTEN
📻 https://b87fm.com/player
http://tun.in/sfxnB

📍#ITDH🇺🇸🇯🇲
3-6p EST 📛

#UrbanMusic #Boston #Jamaica #Global #Africa #UK #Japan #Canada #BOSpoli #MApoli

Reply on Twitter 1642265583663153152 Retweet on Twitter 1642265583663153152 Like on Twitter 1642265583663153152 Twitter 1642265583663153152
teapartyusa1 Chris Lynch @teapartyusa1 ·
2h

The fiction maga's telling is that prosecuting a former pres. is dangerous. maga thinks its dangerous because they think the motive is political. evidence to the contrary is; Michael Cohen pleaded guilty, Trump was individual 1, DOJ won't indict a sitting pres. #BosPoli #MaPoli

Social GP @SocialGP2

“As @djrothkopf writes, prosecuting former leaders may be unprecedented in the U.S., but it is nothing new among the world’s western democracies. In fact, accountability for crimes is essential under the rule of law. @BarbMcQuade “ https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/braggs-office-warns-gop-unlawful-political-interference-rcna77615

Reply on Twitter 1642264640389349379 Retweet on Twitter 1642264640389349379 1 Like on Twitter 1642264640389349379 Twitter 1642264640389349379
teapartyusa1 Chris Lynch @teapartyusa1 ·
2h

.@SeanHannity covered for Trump before+after Jan 6. He knew Trump lost but he lied on TV. Hannity's words may constitute defamation. #DomininionVoting + Smartmatic are suing for billions each #BosPoli #MaPoli

Now he's lying about NY grand jury indictment

Fox News @FoxNews

.@seanhannity sounds the alarm on DA Alvin Bragg's politically motivated actions, warns the US is entering a "very dangerous era."

Reply on Twitter 1642261995075371008 Retweet on Twitter 1642261995075371008 Like on Twitter 1642261995075371008 Twitter 1642261995075371008
ilysekanji Ilyse Levine-Kanji @ilysekanji ·
2h

Thanks to @POTUS, April is #CareWorkersRecognitionMonth! Join us May 8th from 10-11 at the MA Statehouse to advocate for policies designed to grow the workforce that supports people with #Autism & I/DD. #mapoli @MA_Senate @AFAMaction

Register here: https://events.r20.constantcontact.com/register/m?oeidk=a07ejpcyszf0fafdc88&oseq=&c=&ch=

National Women's Law Center @nwlc

It's official: April is #CareWorkersRecognitionMonth!

Thank you @POTUS for recognizing what we keep screaming: care workers are the backbone of our economy. They can't afford to wait for good jobs, better pay, benefits, and access to paid leave! https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2023/03/31/a-proclamation-on-care-workers-recognition-month/

Reply on Twitter 1642259186338742272 Retweet on Twitter 1642259186338742272 Like on Twitter 1642259186338742272 Twitter 1642259186338742272
Load More

From our sponsors




Google Calendar







Search

Archives

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter




Copyright © 2023 Owned and operated by BMG Media Empire LLC. Read the terms of use. Some rights reserved.