Imagine you are in school, and a teacher hands the class a 1,200-page book and says you have four hours to read it and report on it. Welcome to the New York State budget process. The state recently finalized its $154.9 billion spending plan, and did so using the most secretive, dysfunctional approach I have seen in more than 15 years in the state legislature.

Blair Horner of NYPIRG called it “the darkest it’s ever been that we’ve ever seen.” Citizen Union’s Dick Dadey said, “We have a government that operates in the shadows and makes big decisions on behalf of the public without any public scrutiny.” Comptroller Tom DiNapoli noted that this year’s budget “came together late in the process and outside the public’s view.” Democratic Senator Liz Krueger said, “I studied government budgets in school — this wasn’t how it worked. You actually got to see actual budget legislation to vote on that was a whole package. We’re not doing that and I don’t think any of us can justify it.”

It took an all-nighter to get a timely budget, but it took public input totally out of the equation. When Albany spends billions of taxpayers’ hard-earned money, it has an obligation to inform taxpayers of exactly what it’s doing.

The dust settles, and questions remain
Providing spending information to the public didn’t happen, and providing details to legislators was only slightly more transparent. Members of the state legislature voted on budget bills without having any financial details attached. The release of information was so bad that at one point the Assembly majority argued that specifics could be found — not in printed bills — but in newspapers articles. 

Even with a budget in place, legislators still had to play catch-up about what was in, and out, of the final agreement. 

• An expanded veterans’ pension credit was supported by both the Assembly and Senate. In a Veterans’ Day press release, the governor promised it would appear in the final budget. To the surprise of many, it was completely omitted.

• The minimum wage will go to $12.50 an hour Upstate by 2020. While some view this as less damaging than the $15-per-hour wage Downstate, the budget leaves the door open to further upstate increases at the sole discretion of the state budget director to $15 an hour, but provides no timeframe.

• $400 million in funding for local roads was approved, but with no information as to where the money came from or who would receive it. The budget passed on April 1. The distribution details were emailed on April 7.

• Despite endless proclamations by all sides on the need for reform, no ethics legislation was passed. The status quo has not changed, and with the budget process, things appear to have gotten worse.

Status quo prevents public scrutiny
U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara single-handedly turned the legislature on its head when he convicted former Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos and former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver on corruption crimes. His thoughts on the process by which the state crafts a budget could not be more on-target. Bharara once commented: 

“When did 20 million New Yorkers agree to be ruled like a triumvirate in Roman times? It seems to me, if you’re one of the three men in the room, and you have all the power, you don’t tolerate dissent because you don’t have to. You don’t tolerate debate, because you don’t have to. You don’t favor change or foster reform, because you don’t have to, and because the status quo always benefits you.”

This year’s budget process was conducted in a deliberate manner to leave the public in the dark. The people of New York deserved an opportunity to review and respond to how their money was spent. But in typical Albany fashion, the governor and legislative leaders denied them that right. 

Brian M. Kolb (R,I,C–Canandaigua) is the New York Assembly Minority Leader and represents the 131st Assembly District, which encompasses all of Ontario County and parts of Seneca County. Contact him at kolbb@assembly.state.ny.us 

We have a secrecy problem. This may seem odd to say during an era in which the most intimate details of individuals’ lives are on display. Yet government is moving behind closed doors, and this is definitely the wrong direction. In fact, I’m dismayed by how often public officials fight not to do the public’s business in public.

City and town councils regularly go into executive session to discuss “personnel issues” that might or might not truly need to be carried on outside public view. At the state level, lawmakers exempt themselves from public-records laws, underfund public watchdogs, and exempt lobbying expenditures from sunshine laws.

Meanwhile, contributors to federal campaigns increasingly manage to avoid disclosure of their political activities. Government contractors are not subject to most of the transparency rules that affect federal agencies. Federal inspectors general face constant efforts to limit their access to records. Routine information is classified and kept secret. Members of Congress increasingly rely on omnibus spending bills — which are put together behind closed doors by a handful of leaders and congressional staff with no public scrutiny.

Most notably, of course, secrecy extends to national security issues. There are some government secrets that are necessary to protect, and a balance has to be struck between protecting national security and openness. But those who favor secrecy should make their case in public and not rely on the old adage, “Trust me.”

Openness is not a panacea, but it makes good government more likely. Representative democracy depends on our ability to know what’s being done in our name. We cannot exercise the discriminating judgment required of citizens about politics, policies, and politicians if we do not know what they’re doing.

Nor is it possible to maintain the checks and balances required under our Constitution without openness and transparency. We have to shine a bright light on the actions of public officials so that it’s more likely they’ll act with integrity. Justice Louis Brandeis gave perhaps the most famous formulation of this requirement in his 1913 statement, “[S]unlight is said to be the best disinfectant.”

But Judge Damon Keith of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals put an exclamation point on the idea in a 2002 ruling that the government could not carry out secret deportation hearings without proving the need for secrecy. “Democracies,” he wrote, “die behind closed doors.”          

Lee Hamilton is director of the Center on Congress (www.centeroncongress.org) at Indiana University (IU), distinguished scholar at the IU School of Global and International Studies, and professor of practice at the IU School of Public and Environmental Affairs. Hamilton, a Democrat, was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for 34 years, representing a district in south central Indiana.