• 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)

Should the emails of politicians be made public?(assuming they were on the clock)


  • Total voters
    30

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
36,705
Reaction score
17,867
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Should the emails of politicians be made public?(assuming the emails were made while they were on the clock)

Yes
No
Maybe/I do not know



I say yes.What they do with tax payer funded property while on the clock working for the tax payer is the business of the tax payer.
 
Last edited:
Yes, but ALL politicians, not just a choice few who garner negative publicity.
 
Should the emails of politicians be made public?(assuming the emails were made while they were on the clock)

Yes
No
Maybe/I do not know



I say yes.What they do with tax payer funded property while on the clock working for the tax payer is the business of the tax payer.

I would say within a certain time frame. Politicians should have a window where their correspondences are not public, but at some point, withing a few years of leaving office, they should be made public.

Private email addresses should be private and stay private.
 
I really dont know.
On one hand they are working for the public and the people but on the other hand they also have a right to privacy. But i do belive in a transparent government. So im leaning 80% yes they should and 20% no they shouldnt. Im in a 3/4 pickle so to say.
 
Their job related emails should be discoverable via FOI. That's a little different than"making them public. But only a little.
 
I really dont know.
On one hand they are working for the public and the people but on the other hand they also have a right to privacy. But i do belive in a transparent government. So im leaning 80% yes they should and 20% no they shouldnt. Im in a 3/4 pickle so to say.
A public servant in a public office doesn't get to have privacy at work. For most everyone who has a job where they can send emails from a company computer, the emails belong to the company you're working for.
 
I can tell you from having help public office that everything I did as a Councilman was open to the public with one exception. When we were in executive session nothing that took place could be make public and to this day a few years later I cannot talk about any of it other than than subjects discussed.

So all emails in office are fair game.

The continued attacks on Sarah Palin have become a bigger joke than the lies about which I still say come from fear of her, and not reality.
 
I wouldn't have a problem with them being made public, with one exception.

I don't know if government employees are supposed to send email discussing classified information or not, and if they are, then those obviously, should not be made public.
 
Within reason, kinda like what Simon said, emails sent while on government computers, that are job related, should be available under freedom of information.
 
Yes, but ALL politicians, not just a choice few who garner negative publicity.

Yes, and I'd prefer the media not invest all their time in the E-mails that are controversial. I am equally interested in the good things the politicians did while in office.

I couldn't help but laugh about the whole "lame stream media", while MSNBC apparently couldn't find a single good thing Palin did while governor...

Hell, the same thing could be said about the Wikileaks document releases. The only media attention was given to the controversial stories.

This is one area I'm agreeing with Palin on.
 
Last edited:
How about the email and other correspondence of non-government companies?

.
 
Should the emails of politicians be made public?(assuming the emails were made while they were on the clock)

Yes
No
Maybe/I do not know



I say yes.What they do with tax payer funded property while on the clock working for the tax payer is the business of the tax payer.

If the government can read the people's e-mail any time then the people can read the government's e-mail at any time.
 
NO

We should not be able to intrude on peoples private lives just because they are public servants. (bus drivers, lawyers, fireman, police...) Even if they did break the law, they should be able to have a trial without becoming the center of the media. The only things that should be revealed are those things found criminal AND having a direct and considerable effect on the public.
 
Yes, but ALL politicians, not just a choice few who garner negative publicity.

I understand that you're butthurt about Palin, but do we really want to see them all? Like every town councilman?

I voted yes because I think as a matter of public accountability, etc. (except in obvious cases where say the President or Secretary of Defense deal with sensitive national security issues). The big names will still be the only ones covered by the national media (do you really expect Fox and CNN to devote time to every politician?). So nothing would have changed here. Palin's would still get a lot of attention because...she's famous, she's possibly running for President, etc.
 
NO

We should not be able to intrude on peoples private lives just because they are public servants. (bus drivers, lawyers, fireman, police...) Even if they did break the law, they should be able to have a trial without becoming the center of the media. The only things that should be revealed are those things found criminal AND having a direct and considerable effect on the public.

Everything politicians do should be made public. They are working for us! How are we supposed to make intelligent and fair judgments on a politician's actions without all the facts?
 
I would think that anyone receiving private email at a place of work no matter what that work is has no expectation of privacy. If you open your private email at work you should know better than to have that respected as private. The personal use of the internet at a place of business should carry no expectation of privacy and yes any email that is opened on a government computer should be recoverable. No matter what the email address either public of private. You use someone else's equipment to do personal thing it's tough luck when the world knows.
 
NO

We should not be able to intrude on peoples private lives just because they are public servants. (bus drivers, lawyers, fireman, police...) Even if they did break the law, they should be able to have a trial without becoming the center of the media. The only things that should be revealed are those things found criminal AND having a direct and considerable effect on the public.

Public officials =/= public servants
 
I really don't see the need for us to stick ourself into every corner of a public officials life. Not the public. Will their emails be reviewed by security agencies and the like. Of course. But does the public need to be aware of these things as well unless something criminal has been found. Of course not. If they are not breaking the law, a persons privacy should be maintined as much as possible. These public officials do have a high degree of oversight in their lives, but it doesn't need to be complete oversight by the public.
 
Hmm, it looks like I'm in the minority in this thread, which actually surprises me. No, their emails should absolutely NOT be made public. It will just lead officials to self-censor, and that doesn't help the public. In order to govern effectively, officials need to be able to share ideas openly with one another, float trial balloons of new ideas, compromise with their political opponents, and yes, just blow off some steam like everyone else. If they know that their emails are going to be made public, these things will all be much harder to accomplish.

The exception to this is if their records are subpoenaed due to possible wrongdoing, or if the politician in question consents to it.
 
Force any system of accountability on politicians and they will legislate a way out of them.
 
In a way, I agree with Kandahar. Public officials are supposed to help us, but by putting this kind of pressure on them, we make them feel besieged by us, like we are the enemy. We aren't perfect people and that's one main reason anyone would be outraged if they knew their every action was being left open to public speculation. Limited, competent oversight, but not complete public oversight.
 
Hmm, it looks like I'm in the minority in this thread, which actually surprises me. No, their emails should absolutely NOT be made public. It will just lead officials to self-censor, and that doesn't help the public. In order to govern effectively, officials need to be able to share ideas openly with one another, float trial balloons of new ideas, compromise with their political opponents, and yes, just blow off some steam like everyone else. If they know that their emails are going to be made public, these things will all be much harder to accomplish.

The exception to this is if their records are subpoenaed due to possible wrongdoing, or if the politician in question consents to it.

How dare you not take the populist, simplistic view of others!

There is a reason why most government documents are not released immediately due to FoI. After the officials have left office, it is valuable to see how they thought, the things they considered, who they liked and where annoyed with. Having all that immediately available would pretty much cripple their ability to work. Just look at this board: if even a rumor that some unpopular idea is being considered is enough to start a 100 + post thread condemning the official for even considering it. When discussing options for a problem, all options should be considered, even unpopular ones. Having the documents immediately or nearly so available would end the ability of officials to actually consider unpopular options. Officials would spend all their time answering questions about what they wrote, instead of doing what they are being payed to do.
 
Back
Top Bottom