Open government in Vermont had an all-too-rare victory this week in the Vermont Legislature. Senate President Pro Tempore Peter Shumlin decided to scuttle a bill that would have allowed the University of Vermont and state colleges to guarantee anonymity to people who give the schools money.
This was no easy gesture for Shumlin, who had to oppose colleagues who see nothing wrong with secrecy in government. He probably made few friends in the Statehouse or at the public colleges.
The best argument supporters could come up with for an amendment to a housekeeping bill was that other states do it, and that UVM might lose out on some donations in the future. The provision was another assault among many on the free flow of public information. And to think the amendment was pushed by those who decry any limits on academic freedom.
The good news is that the donor anonymity effort failed. The bad news is that the bill with the amendment was on greased tracks to passage until a mounting outcry from outside the Statehouse, chiefly from the media, led one legislative leader to reconsider. How close the bill with the donor anonymity amendment came to final passage — versions passed both houses — is one more sign that too many lawmakers remain tone deaf when it comes to open government.
The path the provision traveled raises questions about whether some lawmakers understand who they represent when they take their seats in Montpelier. When will these legislators realize that access to government records and meetings is one of the key means by which citizens keep their government accountable? Without transparency, there is no way to ensure government remains answerable to the people.
The amendment sought to give UVM, the Vermont State Colleges and the Vermont Student Assistance Corp. — which provides student aid — the power to keep secret the names of donors, leaving it to the institutions to ensure that the money exerts no undue influence.
The donor anonymity amendment was introduced by Sen. Jeannette White, D-Windham, to a bill passed last year by the House. The amendment was guided through the Government Operations committees of both chambers, chaired by White in the Senate and by Rep. Donna Sweaney, D-Windsor, in the House. They hold seats on the UVM board of trustees reserved for legislators.
White and Sweaney are among a number of lawmakers who either are trustees of UVM, the state colleges or VSAC, work for the institutions or have business relationships with them.
Lawmakers serving as trustees have an obligation to act as watchdogs for Vermonters rather than advocates in the Legislature for those institutions. The whole affair over donor anonymity shows that members of the Vermont Legislature remain too eager to close off more and more of government.
This was an act that would have forfeited Vermonters’ right to know who wields influence in our public institutions in exchange for making it easier for these educational institutions to raise private money.
This was an act that would have sacrificed the broad public interest for those of a privileged few.
This was an act that would have sold out Vermonters’ right to know for a buck.
That the lawmakers could see none of this on their own undermines their qualification to represent the interests of the people. The time has come to end this propensity to use our laws to sanction secrecy.
This article appeared in the Burlington Free Press
Share
