- Joined
- Jan 10, 2009
- Messages
- 42,744
- Reaction score
- 22,569
- Location
- Bonners Ferry ID USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Being simple minded can be cured. Just add knowledge.
-
This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
Should the emails of politicians be made public?(assuming they were on the clock)
- Thread starter jamesrage
- Start date
Being simple minded can be cured. Just add knowledge.
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2009
- Messages
- 42,744
- Reaction score
- 22,569
- Location
- Bonners Ferry ID USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Why is it that when people want an open government that it is always "anti-government nonsense"?
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2009
- Messages
- 36,894
- Reaction score
- 22,223
- Location
- Didjabringabeeralong
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Communist
Only work related ones made on work computers. The people who pay for your pay-check should be privy to what they're paying you for.
G
Gargantuan
Alright, so we would create a bureaucracy to go through all federal employees' emails to weed out personal stuff, then we would have to create another bureaucracy to weed out sensitive information from emails, then another one to take that sensitive information, and determine which emails of each security clearance level are alright to be released and which are not. That would really be worth it, right?
Oh, and another one would be needed throughout there to determine which employees would be able to read which agency's emails, and another to assign different employees based on security clearance.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2009
- Messages
- 36,894
- Reaction score
- 22,223
- Location
- Didjabringabeeralong
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Communist
Nope, just keep the emails stored until someone requests them under freedom of information, then go through the vetting process that I presume is normally associated with freedom of information.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2011
- Messages
- 3,691
- Reaction score
- 2,243
- Location
- Everywhere and Nowhere
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Independent
In the thread on Sarah Palin's e-mails I said yes, absolutely... but I've since moderated that view. There should be a time stamp on it for when the public has access. Political process can be sensitive and require specialized or even delicate communication. The public shouldn't have access while it is happening, but sometime after the matter is concluded. That way, the officials can still be held accountable yet they will be able to do their jobs.
For instance, imagine if our foreign affairs department was having a sensitive negotiation with another country, and we could read all their e-mails on the fly. What a disaster that would be.
So... yes to transparency... no to instantaneity.
For instance, imagine if our foreign affairs department was having a sensitive negotiation with another country, and we could read all their e-mails on the fly. What a disaster that would be.
So... yes to transparency... no to instantaneity.
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 75,605
- Reaction score
- 39,893
- Location
- USofA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Cain went to Washington once, but he held his breath.
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 75,605
- Reaction score
- 39,893
- Location
- USofA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
yup. I'm a federal employee, and my work emails are subject to review and release at any time that the government wants to do so.
my yahoo.com account, no. my @usmc.mil account, absolutely.
G
Gargantuan
Of course they are "subject to", any email address in the world is "subject to" release and review at any time. but should it be a thing where these emails are made available at a given point after they were sent and received? I don't agree with that. I don't think that US employees should have their emails subject to release and review every month or year, it just doesn't fly to me. If you really want to file a FOIA request and wait 10 years for it to come back so you can read my email, go ahead and be my guest though.
G
Gargantuan
I don't think I really should be posting what security systems we use/don't use on an internet forum. I know though we did take a big hit from the DHS IG (this was released to the public a few years ago) for not having secure enough systems, both physically not guarded enough and technically. Things have changed in terms of beefed up system security, computer rooms are digitally locked now, we have keycards, etc. I mean it could be OK to post it, I'm 49 and I am not really a product of the information age, so I really don't know much about computers other than emailing and internet use. Again it could be OK to post it but I just don't know and don't want to risk having my security clearance downgraded and not being able to do my job... lol
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 71,947
- Reaction score
- 58,495
- Location
- NE Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Yes, but not until a certain time period. Perhaps 4 or 8 years after the time stamp. Even if they are still in office.
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 51,667
- Reaction score
- 35,453
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Yes, they should be baring certain sensitive information that shouldn't be publicized. However, it should follow standard FOIA procedures that requires a number of years to have past.
Yes, government employee's are public servents. However, that does not mean that every member of the public is their supervisor anymore than you can tell a cop not to give you a ticket because they work for you. Government employee's have their own bosses they fall under, or various government entities that act as reviewers of their work. In the SHORT TERM, those are the people the PUBLIC has entrusted the power of oversight to through their electing of officials who install heads of agencies who hire the people who hire people.
An individual citizen has no more rights to immediete release of a government employees emails than a shareholder has over the email of a random person in a company.
After a number of years have passed, the public should be able to ask for the emails to information to be released to further review if they so wish. However, allowing it to be done at any given time would be horribly irresponsible:
1. It'd be fiscally irresponsible as numerous frivulous claims for political and personal reasons would be filed, causing an unnecessary increase in work and decrease in productivity that costs the tax payers money. Additionally, agencies would have to spend more time dealing with media generated controversaries and correcting misinformation based on lack of understanding of technical issues, continuing to decrease producitivity and thus wasting money.
2. It'd have a negative impact on the performance of duties in an efficient manner as they would be more prone to self censor far more, less likely to speak frankly, and spend potentially more time having to defend routine conversation.
Public employees do not function without any oversight, save for perhaps you could argue top executives of a location. But even they are subject to oversight by the various legislative branches. That oversight is there, ALSO serving the public, and is who the public have vested their powers of immediete oversight onto.
At any given time the public has no more oversight over a government officials emails then they are privy to be able to sit in on their economic meetings via FaceTime.
Yes, government employee's are public servents. However, that does not mean that every member of the public is their supervisor anymore than you can tell a cop not to give you a ticket because they work for you. Government employee's have their own bosses they fall under, or various government entities that act as reviewers of their work. In the SHORT TERM, those are the people the PUBLIC has entrusted the power of oversight to through their electing of officials who install heads of agencies who hire the people who hire people.
An individual citizen has no more rights to immediete release of a government employees emails than a shareholder has over the email of a random person in a company.
After a number of years have passed, the public should be able to ask for the emails to information to be released to further review if they so wish. However, allowing it to be done at any given time would be horribly irresponsible:
1. It'd be fiscally irresponsible as numerous frivulous claims for political and personal reasons would be filed, causing an unnecessary increase in work and decrease in productivity that costs the tax payers money. Additionally, agencies would have to spend more time dealing with media generated controversaries and correcting misinformation based on lack of understanding of technical issues, continuing to decrease producitivity and thus wasting money.
2. It'd have a negative impact on the performance of duties in an efficient manner as they would be more prone to self censor far more, less likely to speak frankly, and spend potentially more time having to defend routine conversation.
Public employees do not function without any oversight, save for perhaps you could argue top executives of a location. But even they are subject to oversight by the various legislative branches. That oversight is there, ALSO serving the public, and is who the public have vested their powers of immediete oversight onto.
At any given time the public has no more oversight over a government officials emails then they are privy to be able to sit in on their economic meetings via FaceTime.
G
Gargantuan
Zyphlin, excellent post - totally agreed.