---

For some things there is no reason. The Wisconsin Legislature proved the past week when they tried to butcher the public's right to know.
They didn't get it done, thanks to an overwhelming outcry from the media and the general public.
So far, the secrecy in government they tried to institute which included keeping their own methods of arriving at legislation private, has been taken out of the budget proposal but there is still some things hanging on that also need to be stricken.
Although several newspapers across the state wrote editorials urging legislators to remove the provision that would dismantle hard-fought efforts from our industry to establish transparency during the selection and hiring of public officials, there has been no indication this language will be removed before the budget is adopted.
If adopted as-is, the UW System would only be required to release names of those "seriously considered" for the four top positions. Currently, they are required to disclose the top five candidates for any high ranking position.
Specifically, the language reads:
"Application for UW positions: Modify public records law to make only the names of applicants for UW positions who are seriously considered for appointment or whose name is certified for appointment, and whose name is submitted for final consideration to an authority for appointment subject to open records requests. Specify that, with respect to UW positions, final candidates does not include the five most qualified applicants or each applicant in the case that are fewer than five applicants. In addition, specify that, with regard to the UW System, only the names of applicants for the following positions would be subject to open records law: (a) the UW System President; (b) UW System vice presidents and senior vice president; (c) the chancellor of each UW institution; and (d) the vice chancellor who serves as deputy at each UW Institution."
Legislators are attempting to conceal records that belong in the hands of the public.
Neither of these issues are budgetary.
It is not the time nor the place to try to incorporate them into law. If proposed, it should be done by way of standalone bills that allow for public debate.
What our elected representatives need to know is we, the public, want to have available all the information about their communications.
Every....single....one.
And, one question that needs asking is if the method used to present the attempt to keep what needs to be public private, what does it have to do with the state budget?
There is no cost savings in secret government, is there?