Some lawmakers want to exempt themselves from the Freedom of Information Act

"The General Assembly finds that it is vital in a democratic society that public business be performed in an open and public manner so that citizens shall be advised of the performance of public officials and of the decisions that are reached in public activity and in the formulation of public policy." -- South Carolina Freedom of Information Act.

Those are the words lawmakers approved when they passed that law. Now, some lawmakers don't believe it should be applied to them.

They want to meet in private, and they want the law changed to enable them to meet in private.

Senate Majority Leader Harvey Peeler, R-Gaffney, and House Majority Leader Jim Merrill, R-Daniel Island, want their caucuses to be able to meet in private. They want to discuss politics and legislative priorities and policy decisions where citizens and Democrats can't hear them. Whether the law applies to closed caucus meetings is debated in Columbia, but Peeler and Merrill want the law changed to specifically allow them.

While the letter of the law may not be settled, the principle is, and closed caucus meetings violate the principle lawmakers approved when they passed the Freedom of Information Act.

This is particularly true since the Republican caucus represents a majority of the members of the House of Representatives, 74 of 124 seats. And the GOP caucus also represents a majority of the Senate, 26 of 46 seats.

If a majority of the lawmakers in either house gets together to discuss which laws should be passed, how could lawmakers think this should be done in private?

Why should citizens be informed about the dealings of the County Council but not the state Senate? Is openness only "vital" on the local level and not the state level? Or do lawmakers think that citizens should be advised of the performance of public officials, other than themselves?

And if party caucuses are allowed this secrecy in Columbia, would this principle be extended to other public bodies? Six of seven Spartanburg County Council members are Republicans. Does that mean they can form a GOP caucus that is allowed to meet behind closed doors?

At a time when Congress is rocked by ethical scandals, and polls show that citizens think government corruption is a serious and pervasive problem, clearly more secrecy is not the solution.

Lawmakers should be pushing for more openness and transparency, not the ability to discuss public business in private.