Subject: Re: [EL] WaPo op-ed on transparency
From: Paul Lehto
Date: 4/1/2011, 10:42 AM
To: Steve Hoersting
CC: Election Law <election-law@mailman.lls.edu>

On 4/1/11, Steve Hoersting <hoersting@gmail.com> wrote:
The theme of their *WaPo* piece is that the Obama administration is not at
all keen on disclosure.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/wheres-the-transparency-that-obama-promised/2011/03/31/AFipwHCC_print.html
[snip] -- we get the sense that there may be
well something to at least two theories about disclosure, and that even
disclosure's advocates get it:

1) that the burden of disclosure must be balanced against its costs

2) that disclosure, either demanded or provided, is often a tool and
accelerant for retribution

What I "get" is that without disclosure/transparency, accountability
is not possible.  Who can really be in favor of un-accountability in
government?

What is being styled as "retribution" is at best a minor percentage of
the overall and critical process of accountability in government.

-- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul@gmail.com 906-204-4026 (cell) _______________________________________________ election-law mailing list election-law@mailman.lls.edu http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law