DEBATED A PROPOSAL THAT
THREATENED PROSECUTION FOR
JOURNALISTS REPORTING ON WATER
QUALITY ISSUES.
THE PROPOSAL WAS ULTIMATELY
AMENDED BUT NOT BEFORE IT DREW
NATIONAL ATTENTION.
JOINING US NOW IS BILL LUEDERS,
PRESIDENT OF THE WISCONSIN
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COUNCIL.
THANKS FOR JOINING US.
>> SURE.
>> THE PROPOSAL WARNED
JOURNALISTS THEY SHOULD QUOTE
DIRECTLY FROM A PRESS RELEASE OR
VIOLATORS WOULD BE PROSECUTED.
WHAT WERE THEY TRYING TO
PREVENT?
WHAT WAS THE INTENT THERE?
>> I GUESS THERE HAD BEEN WHAT
THEY PERCEIVED TO BE ERRORS IN
THE REPORTING OF AN EARLIER
REPORT AND THIS WAS THE HIS
HYSTERICAL OVERRAKS OVERREACTION.
THERE'S NO LEGAL BASIS FOR THE
THREAT.
ADDITIONALLY, THREATENED MEMBERS
OF THE COUNTY BOARD IN LAFAYETTE
COUNTY AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES WITH
CONSEQUENCES IF THEY WERE TO
TALK AT ALL ABOUT THIS UPCOMING
GROUNDWATER QUALITY REPORT.
THEY HAD TO TOE THE COMPANY LINE
OR THEY WOULD BE IN BIG TROUBLE.
AGAIN, HUGE CONSTITUTIONAL
PROBLEMS.
THAT'S NOT WHY WE HAVE
INDEPENDENTLY-ELECTED PUBLIC
OFFICIALS, SO THEY CAN BE TOLD
TO SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP.
BOTH PRONGS OF THIS PROPOSAL
WERE REMOVED.
FIRST THE ONE AGAINST MEDIA.
THEN LATER IN THE DAY ON TUESDAY
THE PRONG THAT DEALT WITH PUBLIC
OFFICIALS ELECTED AND PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES IN LAFAYETTE COUNTY.
>> NOW, THE COUNTY BOARD
CHAIRMAN WON'T ADMIT WHO WROTE
IT.
IS IT POSSIBLE THE AUTHOR DIDN'T
KNOW IT WAS BLATANTLY
UNCONSTITUTIONAL?
OR WAS THERE A DIRECT CHILLING
EFFECT?
>> WELL, WHOEVER WROTE THIS
INTENDED TO HAVE A CHILLING
EFFECT, INTENDED TO CHILL
SPEECH, INTENDED TO FRIGHTEN
PEOPLE INTO COMPLIANCE.
IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE THAT THE
PERSON THOUGHT THAT THIS WAS
OKAY, BUT APPARENTLY THE PERSON
DID OR THEY WOULDN'T HAVE
PROPOSED THIS.
AND IT WAS SO OUTLANDISH, AS YOU
NOTED, IT GENERATED NATIONAL
ATTENTION, THE WASHINGTON POST
AND THE NEW YORK TIMES AND I
PRESUME MANY OTHER PAPERS AROUND
THE COUNTRY RAN AN ASSOCIATED
PRESS STORY ABOUT THIS.
IT'S JUST SO, YOU KNOW, CRAZY
THAT IT'S THE TYPE OF THING THAT
DRAWS NATIONAL ATTENTION.
I THINK AT THE HEARING THAT TOOK
PLACE ON THIS ON TUESDAY THERE
WAS A FAIR AMOUNT OF EXPRESSION
BY CITIZENS THAT THEY WERE
EMBARRASSED BY THE CONDUCT OF
THEIR PUBLIC OFFICIALS, THAT
THEY WOULD PUT OUT SOMETHING
LIKE THIS THAT WOULD BRING
DISREPUTE TO THE COUNTY.
>> WE'VE HEARD SIMILAR STORIES
OR ROUGHLY SIMILAR VERSIONS OF
THIS HAPPENING IN OTHER PLACES.
IS THAT BECAUSE WE'RE HEARING
MORE NEWS, THIS GETS A NATIONAL
REPEAT WHEN IT HAPPENS, OR IS IT
HAPPENING MORE OFTEN?
>> I DON'T KNOW.
I THINK IT'S AN ANOMALY.
I HOPE IT IS.
BUT WHAT'S DISSPIRITTING ABOUT
THIS EPISODE IS THAT IT HAPPENED
TO BEGIN WITH, THAT PEOPLE IN
POSITIONS OF AUTHORITY AT A
COUNTY GOVERNMENT LEVEL WHO
DIDN'T KNOW BETTER THAN TO PUT
SOMETHING LIKE THIS FORWARD.
>> BUT QUESTIONS LIKE THIS
EXIST.
GOVERNOR EVERS HAD ISSUES ABOUT
WHAT INFORMATION HE WAS GOING TO
RELEASE TO REPORTERS.
>> YEAH.
THAT WAS THE SECOND
DISSPIRITTING THING THAT WE
HAPPENED THAT WE CALLED
ATTENTION TO THIS WEEK, IS THAT
A MILWAUKEE TELEVISION STATION,
FOX 6, REPORTED THAT IT HAD
REQUESTED INITIALLY A MONTH
WORTH OF EMAILS TO AND FROM
GOVERNOR EVERS, ONE OF HIS KEY
STAFF PEOPLE, AND WAS TOLD THAT
WAS TOO BROAD A REQUEST, THEY
COULDN'T COMPLY.
SO IT ASKED FOR A WEEK'S WORTH
OF EMAILS.
THEY WERE TOLD THAT WAS TOO
BROAD AN ABOUT, THEY COULDN'T
COMPLY.
THEY SAID GIVE US ONE DAY'S
WORTH OF EMAILS.
THEY WERE TOLD THAT WAS TOO
BROAD A REQUEST AND THEY WEREN'T
GOING TO GET ANY RECORDS.
BEGIN,AGAIN, THE MIRROR FACT THAT THE
GOVERNOR DID THAT GENERATED NEWS
STORIES.
I THINK THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE IS
WRONG TO HAVE DENIED THE
REQUEST.
THAT'S NOT UNMANAGEABLE.
THAT'S NOT TOO MUCH.
OUR OPEN RECORDS LAW, LIKE OUR
OPEN MEETINGS LAW, HAS BAKED
RIGHT INTO IT THE PRESUMPTION OF
MAXIMUM OPENNESS.
PUBLIC OFFICIALS ARE SUPPOSED TO
ERR ON THE SIDE OF BEING TOO
OPEN, NOT TOO SECRETIVE.
IN THIS CASE IT LOOKS AS THOUGH
THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE WAS DOING
EVERYTHING IT COULD TO TRY TO
FIND SOME REASON TO SAY NO TO A
REQUEST FROM THIS TELEVISION
STATION, WHEN UNDER THE LAW AND
UNDER GOOD PUBLIC POLICY IT
SHOULD HAVE BEEN DOING
EVERYTHING IT COULD TO FIND SOME
REASON TO SAY YES, HERE ARE YOUR
RECORDS.
>> SO THE CHILLING EFFECT QUIETS
PEOPLE, BUT ALL THE ATTENTION,
DOES THAT HAVE THE OPPOSITE
EFFECT, OF MAYBE KEEPING THIS
FROM HAPPENING SOMEWHERE AGAIN?
>> I HOPE SO.
I HOPE WHAT HAPPENED IN
LAFAYETTE COUNTY AND WHAT
HAPPENED WITH THE GOVERNOR SENDS
A SIGNAL TO PUBLIC OFFICIALS
THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS
THEY CAN'T GET AWAY WITH AND
SHOULDN'T TRY.
IT MAY COME DOWN TO LITIGATION
IN THE CASE INVOLVING THE
TELEVISION STATION, THE
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE.
IF THE STATION WERE TO SUE UNDER
OUR OPEN RECORDS LAW AND SAY
THAT THE DENIAL WAS IMPROPER, I
THINK THE COURTS WOULD AGREE
WITH THAT.
THAT WOULD BE VERY UNFORTUNATE
BECAUSE GOVERNOR EVERS DOESN'T
NEED A BLACK EYE OVER THIS
ISSUE.
HE SHOULD BE SEIZING EVERY
OPPORTUNITY HE CAN TO USE
TRANSPARENCY AS A WAY TO BUILD
TRUST WITH THE PEOPLE THAT HE
REPRESENTS AND SECOND OF ALL TO
MAKE POSITIVE ADVANCES IN AN
AREA WHERE THE PUBLIC IS
ONBOARD.
THE PUBLIC LIKES WHEN PUBLIC
OFFICIALS DO THINGS TO MAKE
GOVERNMENT MORE OPEN AND HE
SHOULD BE DOING THAT.
>> ALL RIGHT.
BILL