|
03/14/07
Sunshine Week 2007
Lawmakers
meet in secret before public sessions
By CHET BROKAW
Associated Press Writer
PIERRE, S.D. (AP) -- When visitors watch the House and Senate
debate and vote on bills during South Dakota's legislative
session, many don't realize most of the issues already have
been hashed out in secret.
For an hour or so before each day's floor session, the lawmakers
in each chamber meet in separate, private party caucuses to
discuss bills, strategies and other issues.
And in the final days of a legislative session, the lawmakers
frequently will stop public debate and disappear into private
caucus meetings, said Denise Ross, a former reporter for the
Rapid City Journal. The legislators then reappear and decide
the fate of the year's most important bills, she said.
"So clearly they are debating and deciding public policy
behind closed doors and the vote is merely a formality,"
Ross said.
Supporters of the decades-old practice argue that the private
meetings help lawmakers learn about bills in an atmosphere
where they feel free to ask questions and provide information
without worrying their remarks might be misinterpreted.
"The misconception is we're going there to strategize
and it's all political maneuvering," said Rep. Larry
Rhoden of Union Center, leader of the House Republican majority.
"The fact is 95 percent of what we do in caucus is allow
our members the opportunity to get better educated on the
legislation that's coming forward."
All four political caucuses in South Dakota's Legislature
are mostly closed. But Sen. Scott Heidepriem of Sioux Falls,
leader of the Democratic minority, said he would like to open
the Senate Democratic caucus. He knows such a change, however,
would take time because lawmakers have become accustomed to
the closed caucus system.
"I don't see why we would want to close it ever to anybody,
and that includes the media," Heidepriem said.
He rejects the argument that closed caucuses lead to a more
freewheeling discuss on issues.
"I think people need to ask themselves what are they
afraid of. What are they afraid of people hearing them say?
What they really think?" Heidepriem said.
South Dakota is one of 10 states where lawmakers hold closed
caucuses on a daily basis, according to a survey by The Associated
Press. Legislatures in more than a dozen other states hold
closed caucuses once or more a week, and a half dozen states
feature such closed meetings on an irregular basis.
Eleven states have open legislative caucuses, and the rest
have a mixture of open and closed caucuses.
In South Dakota, as in some other states, the Legislature
is specifically exempt from the state's open meetings law.
Ross, who covered the Legislature for six years, said she
objects because lawmakers hold closed meetings in the Capitol,
the most public of all buildings in South Dakota.
South Dakota's legislative caucuses generally have been closed
over the years, although Senate Democrats in some years have
opened theirs to the public. The largest caucus, the House
Republicans, allowed reporters to attend throughout the 1980s,
with the discussions off the record unless reporters could
get lawmakers to comment on the record after the meeting.
In recent years, reporters and the general public have been
banned from the caucuses.
All lawmakers now attend party caucuses, but a few mavericks
skipped some meetings in past years.
Jim Thompson, a radio talk show host and rodeo announcer,
decided not to attend Republican caucuses when he was in the
Senate in 1996. He formed his own Independent Thinkers Caucus,
which attracted a few other lawmakers, but he later rejoined
the GOP group.
Thompson said the party caucus system helped turn seemingly
neutral issues into pitched, partisan political fights. "I'm
trying to change government," he said at the time.
Dave Munson, a 24-year legislative veteran who is now mayor
of Sioux Falls, said he sometimes didn't attend caucuses because
he had heard both sides of most issues many times before.
"I sometimes took a break and went down and listened
to what was going on in the hallways," Munson said.
Munson said he never understood the need for closed party
caucuses, but the meetings never bothered him. In any event,
reporters and those interested in a bill can find out what
happens in a caucus within a few minutes of a meeting's end,
he said.
Dave Bordewyk, general manager of the South Dakota Newspaper
Association, said he is not bothered by the closed caucuses
because such discussions are just part of the Legislature's
organizational process.
"While I don't like closed meetings philosophically,
I think the closed door caucus policies you see in this Legislature
are there because they're part of the whole process,"
Bordewyk said. "They're going to have those discussions
somewhere, somehow, even if they're not allowed to be part
of the day's routine inside the Capitol."
Senate Republican Leader Dave Knudson of Sioux Falls said
lawmakers have inherited a system of closed caucuses, and
he agrees they must discuss some issues in private. While
caucuses spend most of their time making sure lawmakers understand
the bills coming up for votes, Senate Republicans also must
discuss how to react if Democrats try various parliamentary
maneuvers, he said.
"I think it does facilitate franker discussion of issues
that are of interest to one party versus the other,"
Knudson said.
Tactics cannot be discussed in open meetings, "since
by their nature you don't want to telegraph your punch,"
Knudson said.
But Heidepriem said Senate Democrats never felt the need to
try to outfox Knudson and the Senate Republicans because both
parties cooperated closely this year.
A closed caucus would be most useful for plotting strategies
in "the bloodlust between parties fighting for control
of the chamber," but the public wants Republicans and
Democrats to stop such fighting, Heidepriem said.
"The other thing to remember is the caucus system is
not described in the Constitution. It's not described in the
statutes," Heidepriem said.
But Rhoden, the House Republican leader, said it's worth remembering
that a caucus is defined as a closed meeting.
Some have complained that public debate is often limited because
lawmakers hold extensive discussions on many issues in private.
Rhoden said caucus discussions often improve public debate
because lawmakers get thorough explanations of bills but must
save their arguments on the bill for the open floor sessions.
House Democratic Leader Dale Hargens of Miller said he was
worried about closed caucuses when he first was elected six
years ago, but he now believes the private meetings help lawmakers
understand the pros and cons of the more than 500 bills introduced
each year.
House Democrats take united stands on a few issues each year,
but only after reaching a consensus, he said. "It's not
that we beat people down and tell them that's how we want
them to vote."
Hargens said he is bothered more by the fact that the Republican
majority shows up for public committee hearings knowing which
lawmakers will make motions to approve, kill or amend each
bill.
|