Republican leaders in the S.C. House recently approved rules allowing their caucus to meet behind closed doors in the Statehouse so they can talk politics and policy without being held publicly accountable. This means the House majority party can meet in private to discuss state business.

The decision sends a terrible message in a state that already has a bad reputation for good-ol'-boy politics and backroom deals. Granted, some other states have similar policies that allow parties to get together in public buildings to discuss politics and strategy.

But the public's business should be conducted in public. As recent problems at the state Department of Transportation underscored, South Carolina government -- across the board -- needs more openness and accountability, not less. Republicans also approved the caucus change at a meeting that many argue was unlawful because no public notice was given.

The state Democratic Party responded to the Republican action by announcing that its caucus meetings would remain open to the public. Why would Republicans want to close the door in the face of South Carolinians -- the people who elected them and pay their salaries?

Post a Comment   View All Comments sabo954 NO meeting of public officials should be private except in the situation of life and death, and/or national security. I don't think either applied to the situation. sabo954 Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:10 pm j_richard Then you agree that any meeting closed on public property, politcal or policy is wrong . I don't mean to get down to few in the bathroom talking of course. j_richard Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 4:37 pm TIGERAI Not sure how you could come to that conclusion..? No it is not ok, democrats were largely shut out of any debate on policy over the last few years in the national congress. I was just saying to say that oh well the black caucus does it is not a valid comparison. The fact that they are in the majority, set the agenda etc is a huge difference. The black caucus could meet at a bar to talk, there aren't that many of them. The difference is that they are not deciding on policy. TIGERAI Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:18 pm j_richard Tigerai If Democrats were doing it would be okay? Is that what you are saying? Or if onyone else wants secret meetings ,besides Republicans, that is okay to? j_richard Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 2:27 pm TIGERAI Penelope, how dare you bring that logical argument in here! These are people who think it was ok for Dick Cheney to craft our nations energy and environmental policy with oil execs in absolute secret. Then refuse to have any light shed on the discussions. Republicans are the majority, your point carries the day. What decision can the black caucus possibly make on their own behind closed doors? None. Again we have a small group propped up as being all powerful. Your the majority! Stop acting like the victim, as if your marginalized. TIGERAI Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:49 pm huntbailey Wow! I just was stating an observation and you have gone and turned it into a Race debate.... typical. To answer your question... you can watch all session on the Public Access channel... I simply read and watched the news over the years to learn that the Black Caucus meets privately and with the NAACP... if you go to the archives you can see this especially in 2000 during the flag debate. You are absolutely CORRECT! There are racial problems throughout this region, our country and the world.... racial issues have been around for thousands of years. We have all been a victim of racial injustice atleast one point in our lives. Yes... even white people. The NAACP has long out lived it's purpose.... these days they are nothing more than bullies promoting contraversy... and extorting money through their many threats. There will always be racial problems and indifferences.... it never will stop the good people in this world can only hope and pray to contain it. huntbailey Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:16 pm j_richard No government area should be a secret meeting place for Republicans , Democrats, caucuses or any other from local to federal , even at so called retreats it is not a party issue . If they wish to keep the public out of the room then they should have video and audio so that they can be viewed by anyone. j_richard Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:02 pm penelope541 Sir, Again, as I stated in my post, I believe all caucus meetings should be open. And, again, as I stated in my post, the primary difference between the BC meeting and the GOP meeting is that the GOP holds the majority of the General Assembly. That is reason enough to require their meetings to be open. I am curious where you get your documentation that "in most cases" the Black Caucus meets with NAACP leaders. While I do not always agree with the NAACP, such as the current Clemson bru-ha-ha, I think not only should the BC be hosting that organization, but the GOP Caucus and the Democratic Caucus should be listening to some of the very real issues put forth be their members and leaders. If there were no racial problems there would be no need for organizations such as the NAACP. And to think there are no racial problems in S.C., and the U.S., and the world, is keeping one's head firmly stuck in the sand. penelope541 Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:47 am huntbailey Penel- "The reason for the need for openness should be obvious even to you." Not sure where you are headed with that one sweet heart! My point was.... why was no one saying anything about the Black Caucus when they meet behind close doors... and in most cases with leaders of the NAACP. That's equality right there!! Let those idiots influence some of our state leaders. huntbailey Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:32 am Jazz We'll have to keep this in mind the next time the News reports our 'local leaders and planners' meet in secret... Sure isn't any outcry then from media. I guess they like the sound of 'executive session'. Jazz Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:17 am Post a Comment   View All Comments