The Possible Diminishing Returns of Government Transparency
When looking at the changes to the Sunshine Laws (link via Combest) that have been proposed in Missouri House Bill 316, it brings to mind Harry S. Truman, who once jested about his desire for a one-armed economist.
I’m referring to the trade-off that one must face when looking at an expanded transparency in government, and how far it can go before excessive red tape leads to a decreased efficiency of government officials that outweighs the value of another marginal increase in transparency. Don’t get me wrong, I am an avid supporter of government transparency and accountability. At the same time, I think that there is a very fine balance between the level of transparency within a government agency and its ability to operate efficiently.
One alternative to the proposed public meeting rules that could satisfy both worlds could be the use of web broadcasts, which would allow municipalities more freedom when scheduling meetings, while still making the content of these meetings available to the public eye.
I don’t think that this particular bill is pushing government transparency too far — in fact, I think the bill is a step in the right direction — but efficiency is definitely a factor to consider in our new age of government transparency. While everyone can agree that increased transparency has positive returns, one has to keep in mind that it is possible — if not likely — that at some point, these returns diminish marginally. It’s just difficult to tell where that point may lie.
I think I agree with you — that government transparency is good, unless it means that all our government officials do is explain what they do to the public. In which case, they aren’t doing anything.
But consider that further transparency can actually increase efficiency. For example, for me to obtain traditional, paper governmental records I have to call an official, get them to find and copy those records, bill me for the costs and then take the time to send those records to me. However, if those records were posted online, the time I waste finding and getting those records is my own.
And how wonderful is it that the efficient method is also more transparent? More information is online for the public.
PS. I especially like Provision 7 of HB 316: Requires a court to order the reimbursement of reasonable costs and attorney fees to the party successfully seeking disclosure of information contained in an investigative report compiled by a law enforcement agency that would otherwise be closed to inspection. Currently, reimbursement is at the court’s discretion…
Comment by Audrey Spalding — February 5, 2009 @ 4:54 p.m.
I had not thought of it like that, you make a great point. I think that any negatives of increased transparency can be eliminated and turned into positives if government officials utilize the internet. They could post every record or meeting that sunshine requires be open to the public online. You’re exactly right, this would increase efficiency and transparency at the same time. Very good point, thank you for commenting.
Comment by Ryan Davisson — February 5, 2009 @ 5:47 p.m.
solution point for the linear programming problem of maximize: govt transparency, minimize: cost/effort = CCTV cameras in every office, streamed online. initial investment + small maintenance staff + one fulltime network admin. and you get comprehensive knowledge of their goings on.
Comment by vroman — February 6, 2009 @ 3:19 p.m.