The Bradenton Herald

Keep sun shining

Headline Lawmakers renew assault on open records

Last year's all-out onslaught on the Sunshine Law statute in the Florida Legislature was defeated by a tenacious, principled defense, spearheaded by Florida journalists.

Now, here we go again. The 2003 Legislature is already facing 30 new proposed exemptions to the law, several soundly criticized by the Florida First Amendment Foundation. More attempts to whittle away at the open-records law are on the horizon, with 13 "shell" bills submitted for future review, with no detail as yet revealed. The struggle against unwise and unwarranted attacks on the public's right to know can never rest, because those who would restrict the citizens' rights are constantly proposing new barriers.

But this year, the war might be a little easier to win, thanks to a Legislature and a citizenry who apparently have heard and understood the message: the Florida open records law is vital to our democracy, our freedoms and the integrity and honesty of our government.

In November, Florida voters adopted a new law which requires the Legislature to achieve a two-thirds majority vote before any new exemption to the Sunshine Law is enacted. This was a major victory, and came at the end of a legislative year in which an unprecedented 153 exemptions were proposed.

Only 23 exemptions ultimately passed, most dealing with anti-terrorism issues and privacy protection in light of growing identity theft — both legitimate concerns. Blatant attacks on the rights of citizens to know what their government is up to were largely beaten back, and the worst special-interest-serving measures were crushed.

The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks spawned most of these proposed exemptions out of fear that terrorists could access public records that could help them plan future attacks. But many legislators appeared to hop on the exemption bandwagon, egged on by lobbyists for a wide assortment of special interests. Some open records were portrayed by lawmakers as dangerous to our nation's very survival, and clearly there were a few documents, such as blueprints to public buildings and water treatment plants, that were not required to remain in the public domain. But by and large, the proposed exemptions had no bearing whatsoever on national security or public safety.

As the column below by First Amendment Foundation Director Barbara Peterson details, bills already filed would restrict the public's access to records that have nothing to do with national security, and everything to do with protecting special interests. Back for a second try after failing last year is one that would exempt from public scrutiny "adverse incident reports" physicians are required to file with the Department of Health when serious mistakes are made during medical procedures. A similar exemption is sought for "adverse incident reports" of pharmacists.

If these bills pass, citizens would be denied access to records that could tell them how often a doctor or pharmacist has made serious errors — basic consumer information to which we have a right.

Also back again is a bill seeking to close all identifying information in public utility records. This is not a privacy issue, as Social Security and personal financial information is already prohibited from release in such records. But it would prevent the public from checking up on who is wasting precious natural resources and whether the utilities are overcharging their customers. If you were considering purchase of a piece of property, you could not check the property's utility records if this bill passes.

There are many other threats to open government in the 30-plus bills already filed, especially in the open-ended "shell" bills whose content won't be known for weeks. Much of the information in the process of being closed off is critical to the people's ability to understand and influence many forces that impact their lives. Public records are the lifeblood of good government, and they belong to the public. We pay for the information in them — not the politicians or special interests.

It may be hard for ordinary citizens to understand just how important the preservation of the open-records law is to them personally. By exposing public records, individual citizens and the press as the public's watchdog have been able to reveal ineptitude, malfeasance and corruption, both in government and private industry. Access to those records must be preserved.