Arizona GOP slammed for changing rules to exempt themselves from public records law

[GMDino]

https://www.rawstory.com/arizona-republicans-2659316455/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Quote:In a searing op-ed for The Arizona Republic on Thursday, E.J. Montini tore into Republicans in the Arizona state legislature for changing the rules to exempt themselves from public records law.



"Republicans, using their small majority in the House and Senate, decided this week to exempt lawmakers from public records laws in order to cover up future misconduct," wrote Montini. "That’s not how they described their action, of course. In fact, Republican House Speaker Ben Toma told Capitol Media Services, 'I don’t think there’s any intention on my part to hide anything.' It’s an interesting statement, since what GOP lawmakers did was create rules that allow them to hide their official exchanges from the public."


Under the new rule, passed over Democratic objections, lawmakers and their staff can destroy their email correspondence after 90 days. They are also seeking to limit debate on "controversial legislation" to 30 minutes.


"If such a rule were in place for the past couple of years, for example, we might not have ever known about the extent Arizona Republican lawmakers went to overturn the election victory of President Joe Biden. That’s why records should be maintained," wrote Montini. "Now, lawmakers will be able to shield themselves from future embarrassments (or investigations) by simply destroying the evidence of who they are and what they said. The fact that some lawmakers presume the need for such protection should give us pause, don’t you think?"
The video player is currently playing an ad.

READ MORE: Republican staffer resigns from North Carolina legislature after white supremacist comments surface


Last year, investigators on the House January 6 Committee discovered that far-right activist and Supreme Court spouse Ginni Thomas corresponded via email with Arizona legislators, urging them to overturn the state's election results. They did not do so, but ultimately ordered an outside firm called "Cyber Ninjas" to conduct a partisan and controversial "audit" of the results in Maricopa County, which ultimately found no wrongdoing.


A number of states have various public records or "sunshine" laws, and state government officials have been caught trying to circumvent them. In Missouri, a state with strong transparency laws, a judge ruled last year that Sen. Josh Hawley "knowingly" tried to conceal records from public scrutiny by using private email accounts when he was the state attorney general.

[*pally*]

I can't imagine that law not being overturned by the courts

[basballguy]

So some legislation was passed that liberals don't agree with. Then someone writes an opinion piece on that legislation....then someone writes an article about the opinion piece on the legislation and that's what you chose to link.

Why not link a story that talks directly about the legislation and allow us to form our own opinions??

I know why....

[GMDino]

(01-27-2023, 12:57 AM)basballguy Wrote: So some legislation was passed that liberals don't agree with.  Then someone writes an opinion piece on that legislation....then someone writes an article about the opinion piece on the legislation and that's what you chose to link.  

Why not link a story that talks directly about the legislation and allow us to form our own opinions??

I know why....

My apologies for not meeting you exacting standards on this board. I know you are known for your in depth reporting and commentating and responses.

I wish I had thought of you before sharing and not doing all the research and providing more links and a nice LONG post that would probably have been questioned for being too long.

I mean, simply because the gist of the new law was clearly explained doesn't mean I shouldn't have included the actual measure. A mistake I will try not to make in the future.

https://www.azhouse.gov/alispdfs/AdoptedRulesofthe56thLegislature.pdf



But, to your point (such as it was), please tell us all "why".

[SunsetBengal]

I don't feel like any politicians from any party should be passing any legislation that exempts themselves from any laws or standards that ordinary citizens are subject to. This is a big deal, no matter the party affiliation.

[basballguy]

(01-27-2023, 04:10 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I don't feel like any politicians from any party should be passing any legislation that exempts themselves from any laws or standards that ordinary citizens are subject to. This is a big deal, no matter the party affiliation.  

I don't know if the legislation is right or wrong but I do know you're unlikely to get unbiased reporting when the linked article's focus is an opinion piece on the legislation and not the actual legislation.  

[Dill]

(01-27-2023, 04:47 PM)basballguy Wrote: I don't know if the legislation is right or wrong but I do know you're unlikely to get unbiased reporting when the linked article's focus is an opinion piece on the legislation and not the actual legislation.  

If one holds governmental transparency to be a value, the legislation is clearly "wrong."
If one values party power over transparency, then it is "right." 

"Liberals" seem to disagree with the latter, along with conservatives who also value transparency (see post #5 above).

The "actual legislation" wouldn't provide us with the context for judging the AZ House's move.

The job of an "opinion piece" in this case would be to explain and assess AZ House behavior, in part by contextualizing
it with references to Hawley in Missouri and the Jan 6 investigation. 

Such pieces assume that suspicious readers can check the legislation in question.