Mary Burke was succinct. She used a single word —“Yes” — to answer four of six questions from the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council about open government.
The Democratic candidate for governor responded affirmatively when asked if she would:
- Release a detailed weekly calendar in advance listing her appointments, public meetings and travel schedule.
- Support ending the Legislature’s exemption from records retention rules in place for other state and local officials.
- Back making public bodies record closed meetings in case of a dispute over what was discussed.
- Conduct all public business on public computer networks and devices.
Those are responses that should please open government advocates.
Burke, a Madison School Board member making her first run for statewide office, also said in her written responses that the Legislature should be subject to the state’s open meetings law, though she continues to believe party caucuses should be able to meet in secret. Why?
“To limit the potential that lobbyists — who would be allowed to attend if caucuses were subject to this law — could have any more influence than they already do,” she said.
We believe she doth protest too much. We’d gladly allow dozens of lobbyists to attend the caucuses where much of the real business of governing (and party arm-twisting) gets done if members of the media and public could also attend.
Gov. Scott Walker, her Republican opponent, was less direct.
In his written responses, Walker sidestepped the question about releasing calendars in advance, saying he makes his calendars available monthly upon request “as required by state law.” He has continued predecessor Jim Doyle’s approach of pre-announcing only select events, often with less than 24-hours’ notice.
Walker also declined to say whether the Legislature should abide by the open records law or be subject to the meetings law, including party caucuses. Instead, he responded that he retains “all public records, including email, for public inspection upon request.”
According to Walker, it’s up to the political parties to open their caucuses, which they could do without a change in state law. He’s right on that point, and we’re still waiting.
And, in response to the question about conducting the public’s business on public electronic devices, he said his office “instituted a clear ethics and professional code of conduct policy for all staff and cabinet officials in 2011. All public business done on any device, public or personal, is subject to Wisconsin’s strong open records laws.”
That’s heartening. As many people know, Walker’s office when he was Milwaukee County Executive set up a secret email system so staffers could evade the records law.
We also asked both candidates to describe the state’s biggest open government problem.
Walker cited the inability of the public to review the state’s finances online — a problem he takes credit for having solved.
“Now the state’s checkbook is online at http://openbook.wi.gov,” Walker said. “Recently, Wisconsin was rated one of the most transparent states in the nation because of this reform.” He vowed to expand the functionality and add local governments.
Burke, in turn, called for disclosure of the source of issue-ad funding.
“Any group spending money in an election on an issue should have to disclose where their money is coming from and abide by campaign finance laws like any other group or candidate,” she said.
Here are the full candidate responses:
Your Right to Know is a monthly column distributed by the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council (www.wisfoic.org), a nonprofit group dedicated to open government. Council member Mark Pitsch is an assistant city editor at the Wisconsin State Journal and president of the Madison chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists.
The nonprofit Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism (www.WisconsinWatch.org) collaborates with Wisconsin Public Radio, Wisconsin Public Television, other news media and the UW-Madison School of Journalism and Mass Communication. All works created, published, posted or disseminated by the Center do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of UW-Madison or any of its affiliates.