Talk:Letter to Nancy Pelosi on committee transparency

From dKosopedia

I don't know enough about existing transparency to contribute more meaningfully here, but I would like to suggest that dkos user polisigh seems to know an enormous amount about how these things work. Could you perhaps outline the sort of things you're looking for in terms of transparency? Is there some specific thing wrong with the policies of committees as they stand now? thanks for starting this letter section. --Greenreflex 20:44, 13 November 2006 (PST)

I'm trying to revisit this issue (transparency in committe activities) especially as it relates to attaining transcripts and possibly even mp3s of committee hearings and markup sessions. Since the house and Senate both operate on the basis of rules they adopt at the beginning of each congress, getting some correspondence sent before the start of the 110th congress would be great. If that is a little ambitious, at least getting organized around the issue would be helpful, since greater transparency would certainly equal greater influence. This idea comes from this comment in annan's diary. --Greenreflex 13:53, 25 November 2006 (PST)

Also, here is a page describing how transcripts are already available, but "two months to two years" after the hearings occur.--Greenreflex 13:56, 25 November 2006 (PST)

I just found the relevant section of the House Rules from the 109th Congress:

Page 153 Their <<NOTE: Sec. 319. Secrecy of committee procedure.>> proceedings are not to be published, as they are of no force till confirmed by the House. Rushw., part 3, vol. 2, 74; 3 Grey, 401; Scob., 39.* * * In the House it is entirely within rule and usage for a committee to conduct its proceedings in secret (IV, 4558-4564; see also clause 2(g) of rule XI), and the House itself may not abrogate the secrecy of a committee's proceedings except by suspending the rule (IV, 4565). The House has no information concerning the proceedings of a committee not officially reported by the committee (VII, 1015) and it is not in order in debate to refer to executive session proceedings of a committee which have not formally been reported to the House (V, 5080-5083; VIII, 2269, 2485, 2493; June 24, 1958, pp. 12120, 12122; Apr. 5, 1967, p. 8411). However, a complaint that certain remarks that might be uttered in debate would improperly disclose executive-session material of a committee is not cognizable as a point of order in the House where the Chair is not aware of the executive-session status of the information (Nov. 5, 1997, p. 24648). On one occasion a Member was permitted to refer to the unreported executive session proceedings of a subcommittee to justify his point of order that a resolution providing for a select committee to inquire into action of the subcommittee was not privileged (June 30, 1958, p. 12690). In one case the House authorized the clerk of a committee to disclose by deposition its proceedings (III, 2604). Where a committee takes testimony it is sometimes very desirable that the proceedings be secret (III, 1694), as in the investigation in the Bank of the United States in 1834, when the committee determined that its proceedings should be confidential, not to be attended by any person not invited or required (III, 1732). It is for the committee, in its discretion, to determine whether the proceedings of the committee shall be open or not (clause 2(g) of rule XI). Clause 2(k) of rule XI establishes the procedure for closing a hearing because of defamatory, degrading, or incriminating testimony. Clause 11(d) of rule X establishes special rules governing the closing of hearings of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Under clause 2 of rule XI, all hearings and business meetings conducted by standing committees shall be open to the public, except when a committee, in open session, by record vote, with a majority present, determines to close the meeting or hearing for that day for the reasons stated in that clause. <<NOTE: Sec. 320. Reception of petitions by committees.>> * * * Nor can they receive a petition but through the House. 9 Grey, 412.

I got this from here. The emphasis is obviously mine. The house and senate approve their rules at the beginning of each Congress (109th, 110th, etc.), so they adopt this every two years when they first meet. You can browse the house rules here. --Greenreflex 12:21, 26 November 2006 (PST)

Also, in the House Rules and Manual, in the "Procedures of Committees and Unfinished Business" Section, Page 542 has the following:

(e)(1)(A) <<NOTE: �794. Required records.>> Each committee shall keep a complete record of all committee action which shall include-- (i) in the case of a meeting or hearing transcript, a substantially verbatim account of remarks actually made during the proceedings, subject only to technical, grammatical, and typographical corrections authorized by the person making the remarks involved; and (ii) a record of the votes on any question on which a record vote is demanded. (B)(i) <<NOTE: Sec. 795. Public availability.>> Except as provided in subdivision (B)(ii) and subject to paragraph (k)(7), the result of each such record vote shall be made available by the committee for inspection by the public at reasonable times in its offices. Information so available for public inspection shall include a description of the amendment, motion, order, or other proposition, the name of each member voting for and each member voting against such amendment, motion, order, or proposition, and the names of those members of the committee present but not voting.

This is available here. See page 542. --Greenreflex 12:53, 26 November 2006 (PST)

Retrieved from "http://localhost../../../l/e/t/Talk%7ELetter_to_Nancy_Pelosi_on_committee_transparency_455e.html"

This page was last modified 20:53, 26 November 2006 by dKosopedia user Greenreflex. Content is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License.