Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Another coronavirus victim: public access to government

California Gov. Gavin Newsom

California Gov. Gavin Newsom of California issued an executive order allowing local and state bodies to meet on the telephone, cutting the public off from what are typically open meetings.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Advocates of open government are sounding the alarm that local, state and federal officials are too quickly sacrificing public access to the cause of public health during the coronavirus pandemic.

"This is the worst time to be putting up obstacles to access," said Daniel Bevarly, executive director of the National Freedom of Information Coalition, a group of state and national organizations promoting access to the meetings and records of government.

Bevarly is referring to a recent flood of emergency legislative changes, courthouse closures, orders from governors and mayors, and legal guidance from attorneys general making it more difficult to watch government in action — and at a time when officials are making sometimes unprecedented economic and public safety decisions in managing the Covid-19 outbreak.


The ability of journalists and citizens to attend and participate in public meetings and obtain public records is a backbone of our democracy. It allows for the informed involvement and input of regular citizens in the decision-making process. In addition, the oversight from the public and the media prevents improper actions before they happen and allows for the exposure of wrongdoing to the cleansing effects of sunshine.

The most common change so far is one that Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom of California made this month by executive order: allowing local and state bodies in the nation's most populous state to meet on the telephone. (Most state public access laws require that the majority of a public body meet together at a location open to the public.)

GOP Gov. Eric Holcomb of Indiana was a little more aggressive in his executive order last week, suspending the requirement allowing for public participation in meetings. His order also temporarily banned telephone requests for public records and suspended one of the initial deadlines that agencies have to respond to records requests.

Carolina Beach, a town of 6,700 on the North Carolina coast just south of Wilmington, provides a good example of what happens when a public body — in an attempt to deal with an emergency — gets itself sideways with open meeting laws.

The Town Council appears to have violated the law last week when — after an influx of students on spring break and with no interest in social distancing — it went behind closed doors to discuss possibly closing the beaches and declaring a state of emergency.

The law requires a public policy matter of that sort to be discussed in a public meeting. Town officials apparently were also unaware they were required to cite, in public, one of the specific reasons the law allows for closing the meeting.

Another open government group, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, is maintaining a running list of changes being made in federal and state access laws in response to coronavirus.

Meanwhile, the National Freedom of Information Coalition, Bevarly's group, issued a statement last week signed by 132 state and national open government organizations saying that technology is available to assure public access and involvement in meetings even if they are not held in a state capital, county courthouse or city hall.

"We strongly urge government branches and agencies to recommit to, and not retrench from, their duty to include the public in the policy-making process," they said."Government bodies should not opportunistically take advantage of the public's inability to attend large gatherings to make critical decisions affecting the public's interest if those decisions can reasonably be postponed."

If meetings must be held, the coalition of groups argued, governments should be sure to tell the public when and where they are happening and how they can participate. Widely available technology should be used to conduct the sessions and a record created for quick posting online.

Regarding government records, the statement advises officials to lean toward public disclosure without requiring citizens to go through a request process that could involve long delays.

Another concern, Bevarly said, is that elected and appointed public officials — many of whom are working from home — make sure they use their government phones and email accounts to communicate about official business and that their texts and emails be archived.

So far in Washington, meanwhile, the number of reporters at the White House and in the Capitol has been curtailed because of the relatively cramped conditions.

But a daily briefing by President Trump and senior officials managing the government's coronavirus response has become a fixture on TV. And access to officials has remained largely unchanged during the negotiations on the $2 trillion economic stabilization package, except that most senators have stayed in their offices and most House members have gone back to their districts.

Bevarly said some governments are woefully behind in their use of technology to engage citizens. "This is a golden opportunity to revisit this kind of engagement," he said.

The rush of changes to access rules during the pandemic started, ironically, as access groups and media organizations celebrated Sunshine Week beginning March 15. The annual event is intended to highlight the importance of open access — sunshine, in a sense — to the proper operation of American democracy.


Read More

U.S. Capitol.
As government shutdowns drag on, a novel idea emerges: use arbitration to break congressional gridlock and fix America’s broken budget process.
Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

Congress's productive 2025 (And don't let anyone tell you otherwise)

The media loves to tell you your government isn't working, even when it is. Don't let anyone tell you 2025 was an unproductive year for Congress. [Edit: To clarify, I don't mean the government is working for you.]

1,976 pages of new law

At 1,976 pages of new law enacted since President Trump took office, including an increase of the national debt limit by $4 trillion, any journalist telling you not much happened in Congress this year is sleeping on the job.

Keep ReadingShow less
Someone using an AI chatbot on their phone.

AI-powered wellness tools promise care at work, but raise serious questions about consent, surveillance, and employee autonomy.

Getty Images, d3sign

Why Workplace Wellbeing AI Needs a New Ethics of Consent

Across the U.S. and globally, employers—including corporations, healthcare systems, universities, and nonprofits—are increasing investment in worker well-being. The global corporate wellness market reached $53.5 billion in sales in 2024, with North America leading adoption. Corporate wellness programs now use AI to monitor stress, track burnout risk, or recommend personalized interventions.

Vendors offering AI-enabled well-being platforms, chatbots, and stress-tracking tools are rapidly expanding. Chatbots such as Woebot and Wysa are increasingly integrated into workplace wellness programs.

Keep ReadingShow less
Women holding signs to defend diversity at Havard

Harvard students joined in a rally protesting the Supreme Courts ruling against affirmative action in 2023.

Craig F. Walker/The Boston Globe via Getty Images

Diversity Has Become a Dirty Word. It Doesn’t Have to Be.

I have an identical twin sister. Although our faces can unlock each other’s iPhones, even the two of us are not exactly the same. If identical twins can differ, wouldn’t most people be different too? Why is diversity considered a bad word?

Like me, my twin sister is in computing, yet we are unique in many ways. She works in industry, while I am in academia. She’s allergic to guinea pigs, while I had pet guinea pigs (yep, that’s how she found out). Even our voices aren’t the same. As a kid, I was definitely the chattier one, while she loved taking walks together in silence (which, of course, drove me crazy).

Keep ReadingShow less
The Domestic Sting: Why the Tariff Bill is Arriving at the American Door
photo of dollar coins and banknotes
Photo by Mathieu Turle on Unsplash

The Domestic Sting: Why the Tariff Bill is Arriving at the American Door

America's tariff experiment, now nearly a year old, is proving more painful than its architects anticipated. What began as a bold stroke to shield domestic industries and force concessions from trading partners has instead delivered a slow-burning rise in prices, complicating the Federal Reserve's battle against inflation. As the policy grinds on, economists warn that the real damage lies ahead, with consumers and businesses absorbing costs that erode purchasing power and economic momentum. This is not the quick victory promised but a protracted burden that risks entrenching higher prices just as the economy seeks stability.

The tariffs, rolled out in phases since early March 2025, have jacked up the average import duty from 2 percent to around 17 percent. Imported goods prices have climbed 4 percent since then, outpacing the 2 percent rise in domestic equivalents. Items like coffee, which the United States cannot produce at scale, have seen the sharpest hikes, alongside products from heavily penalized countries such as China. Retailers and importers, far from passing all costs abroad as hoped, have shouldered much of the load initially, limiting immediate sticker shock. Yet daily pricing data from major chains reveal a creeping pass-through: imported goods up 5 percent overall, domestic up 2.5 percent. Cautious sellers absorb some hit to avoid losing market share, but this restraint is fading as tariffs are embedded in supply chains.

Keep ReadingShow less