E-Mail Bill just bad law

Note from the MCA: This bill was supported by our State House Rep. Betsey Patten. It is as the editorial headline states a bad law.

Editorial

The Citizen May 8, 2009

The death of House Bill 349 was a win for transparent government and the people of New Hampshire.

The bill was defeated in the state Senate Tuesday, but House advocates of the measure promise they will be back with something like it, if not in this session of the Legislature, then when the same lawmakers convene in 2010.

HB 349 would have shielded from the public electronic communications between themselves and their constituents. The argument in its favor reflected a concern by some lawmakers that “fear on the part of constituents and others that their communications will be made public without their knowledge or consent has had and will continue to have a chilling effect on such communications to the detriment of the legislative process.”

The bill would have darkened the work of the Legislature further by prohibiting the issuance of subpoenas when wrongdoing might be suspected.
What HB 349 would have done was to allow the creation of a wall between some legislators and the people of their state.

The 400 members of the House of Representatives and 24 senators are elected by people in particular districts, but they have a broader responsibility once they take office — one to all the people of New Hampshire on issues that affect all those people. People-to-lawmaker communication is important and 21st century technology allows a variety of ways to make it happen. At the same time, there is something shadowy about allowing lawmakers to conduct conversations in an isolated environment and that is exactly what HB 349 does. It encases conversation generated electronically in a shell and provides an environment in which mischief can easily be practiced. We are not as concerned with a lawmakers’s conversation with the constituent whose interest is in good government or a particular local matter as we are with the “constituent” who is looking for special favor or whose motivation is self-interest or the interests he or she might represent. A subtitle for House Bill 349 might be, “The Lobbyists Relief Act of 2009.”

The attempt to shield legislative e-mail from subpoena was a particularly onerous provision of HB 349 and by itself was cause for defeat in the Senate Tuesday. The provision exempted lawmakers from the legal process that holds them responsible to the people. It was a provision that put them above the people and the laws they are sworn to uphold.

The bill crafted in, and passed by, the House of Representatives included the following: “All such electronic records shall be confidential and privileged and shall be protected from direct or indirect means of discovery, subpoena, or admission into evidence in any judicial or administrative proceeding.”

It is language that strikes at the very foundation of law enforcement. It protects from discovery in an e-mail evidence of wrongdoing, even criminal conspiracy. It shields lawmakers from the legal process that protects and reasonably restrains each of us.

Language that puts lawmakers above the law is reason enough for the defeat of such legislation and something against which the attorney general should testify in hearings on similar measures in the future.

House Bill 349 asked for too much trust. It did not bring lawmakers and constituents closer together; on the contrary, it would have allowed, and in some cases even promoted, less responsibility and less responsiveness. The people of New Hampshire trust their lawmakers and others they elect to office, but even so, they should guard against any actions that might undermine that trust — actions such as the now defunct HB349The people of New Hampshire trust their lawmakers and others they elect to office, but even so, they should guard against any actions that might undermine that trust — actions such as the now defunct HB349