A coalition of consumer, environmental, press and other organizations today expressed strong opposition to a bill that would create an exception in Maine's Freedom of Access laws for the governor and the governor's office. LD 1805 would keep confidential proposed legislation, reports and working papers of the governor's office until the end of the Legislative session. Opponents say the bill is so broad and so vague that it could deny access to other important information used to develop public policy.

Under current law, Maine legislators are allowed to shield working papers from public scrutiny. And Gov. Paul LePage wants the same privilege. In testifying for the bill, his deputy counsel Michael Cianchette says all the bill does is protect the governor's decision-making process until the decision is final or the Legislature adjourns.

Cianchette says last year the governor's office found itself inundated with requests under the Freedom of Access Act for information about who and what was behind the drafting of LD 1, his regulatory reform package. And many of the requests, which require documents to be gathered and copied, came from organizations with a political agenda.

"We were receiving Freedom of Access requests left and right, front and center, for all matters of documents long before we had decided on any particular course of action," he said. "So the way we would envision this working is certainly those could come in but the documents would remain confidential until that amendment was offered, until those decisions were put forward. And then people would be able to see what was considered and declined to put in."

But opponents say the public's right to know is fundamental to a healthy democracy and to sound decision-making by elected leaders. They say secrecy breeds public distrust in government as well as potential corruption. Mal Leary is vice-president of the Maine Freedom of Information Coalition. In the interest of full disclosure he's also a regular contributor to MPBN. Leary has covered the State House for more than 30 years. He says the proposed legislation would put Maine far outside the norm compared to other states. And he says he hasn't heard or seen a compelling argument for the governor to have an exemption.

"Gov. Longley didn't see this as needed. Gov. Brennan didn't see this as needed. Gov. McKernan didn't see this as needed. Gov. King didn't see this as needed and Gov. Baldacci didn't see it as needed," Leary says. "So, in my mind, all of these governors, both parties, Independents, never sought this, and they seemed to be able to accomplish governing the state arguably well without having that exemption."

Leary and other members of the coalition say it's common practice for the governors and their administrations to complain about requests for documents under Maine's Freedom of Access laws. This is how Suzanne Goucher, president of the Maine Freedom of Information Coalition describes government transparency under FOAA.

"It's inconvenient. It's messy. It's time-consuming," she says. "But inconvenience and time-consuming are no reason to throw a cloak of secrecy over the policies and initiatives of the state."

And while this bill would not apply only to Gov. LePage but to future governors as well, many opponents point out that LePage has repeatedly vowed to have the most transparent administration in Maine history. George Smith, the former executive director of the Sportsman's Alliance of Maine--turned columnist and blogger--says he thinks the LePage administration is the least transparent he's seen in 40 years of experience in and around the State House.

"The promise of our nation is government by the people and for the people, not government hidden from the people," Smith said. "We want service not secrecy, openness not obstructionism."

The governor's deputy counsel, Michael Cianchette, was the only person who testified in favor of the legislation. Cianchette points out that other governors, absent an exemption that keeps their working papers private, have stopped creating records when it comes to sensitive matters. Instead they have more in-person meetings and leave less of a paper trail, which Cianchette says also hurts the public.

http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/getPDF.asp?paper=HP1331&item=1&snum=125