Saturday, January 27, 2007
Editorial: A not-so-candid legislative camera
Online video could add 10 pounds of truth to the General Assembly.
From the RoundTable blog
Read the latest entries
A Democratic operative is trolling the halls of the General Assembly with a video camera. He records committee meetings where Republicans kill bills without a recorded vote, posts the footage to the popular video-sharing Web site YouTube and provides links on the blog assemblyaccess.com.
Democrats call it open government. Republicans call it the first salvo in a gotcha war. Both are right, but the peace should come through independent broadcasts, not partisan escalation.
Broadband Internet connections and digital video editing have created a powerful vehicle for open government. Recorded meetings posted to the Internet give the public much-needed access at a time when Republicans strive to keep votes secret.
Party operatives, however, use footage for partisan gain, too. Just ask former Sen. George Allen. His infamous "macaca" moment has been viewed more than a half million times on YouTube.
Democrats have already abused legislative footage, attempting to embarrass Republican Del. Jeffrey Frederick not for his official acts but for trying to block the camera.
Democrats also choose which videos to post. Virginians will not soon see Democratic delegates making fools of themselves on assemblyaccess.com. It will be a one-sided affair as long as the left hand holds the camera.
Republicans therefore threaten to respond in kind. They too can film embarrassing moments and cherry pick clips.
Rather than wage war through partisan lenses, the General Assembly should embrace video and the openness it fosters.
Inexpensive technology allows live, online streaming of meetings -- or at least archived footage. Virginians could view the lawmaking process and reach their own conclusions about the actions of their elected representatives.
Online video of legislative meetings is nothing new. C-SPAN has shown Congress on its Web site for years. Roanoke and Blacksburg both stream their meetings live. And the cost is reasonable. Blacksburg, for example, spends only about $10,000 annually.
Both Democrats and Republicans no doubt would use video of the General Assembly for political gain, but there would always be an objective original against which to compare creative editing.
If lawmakers fear the footage might embarrass them or that their votes might not sit well with voters, there is an easy evasion: Don't say embarrassing things or vote against the good of the commonwealth.
