This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2015, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

The letter from Utah media lawyers to legislative leaders bemoaning the Legislature's closing of party caucuses to discuss critical issues in private is the latest salvo in an age-old battle between the press and government over access to the public's business.

And it revives the age-old question: Why are elected politicians so averse to letting the voting public know exactly where they stand on important legislation that impacts the lives of the folks they ask to vote for them?

Lawyers for the Utah Media Coalition — made up of The Salt Lake Tribune, Deseret News, Standard-Examiner, Daily Herald, The Spectrum, Herald Journal, The Associated Press, KSL, KUTV, KTVX, KSTU, the Utah Press Association and the Utah Headliners chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists — hand delivered the letter to legislative leaders Tuesday, claiming that by holding closed-door meetings where they debate and vote on bills, lawmakers are breaking the law.

Legislative leaders counter, of course, that the Utah Open and Public Meetings law, which requires that legislative and government meetings be open to the public, has an exemption for political caucuses.

The elephant in that room is the exemption was made by the very legislators who use it to discuss and vote on critical legislation behind closed doors.

It is particularly troubling in Utah, where the Republican Party is so dominant its members can decide behind closed doors how a bill will be decided then rubber-stamp the decision with a public vote on the floors of the Senate and the House without letting constituents know what kind of arguments were made, who had objections and why the votes were cast the way they were.

Republicans hold a 63-12 advantage over Democrats in the House and 24-5 in the Senate — both veto-proof supermajorities so they can decide the issue in secret, then make it official on the floor without any input from the Democrats.

Senate Majority Leader Ralph Okerlund and House Majority Leader Jim Dunnigan argued that closed caucuses allow legislators to speak openly and honestly while debating issues without grandstanding or game-playing.

I've heard that argument before and never quite understood why legislators have such a hard time speaking openly and honestly without grandstanding or game-playing in a public meeting.

The legislative leaders also point out that votes in caucus are not binding. They are just straw votes so the ones that count and create a law are done in public.

But here's why that is a crock.

The Legislature voted in 2011 to gut the Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA) without even running the issue by the little posse of Democrats in the two bodies.

The bill was a devastating blow to the right of the public to view public records that may prove critical to their lives.

The decisions were made in secret, closed caucuses in both the House and the Senate and, in the House particularly, arms were twisted to make sure the Republicans voted unanimously on the floor because, as they say, there is political safety in numbers.

There were 16 newly elected representatives in the Republican House caucus, and many of them told me later they were intimidated by the more veteran members to commit to voting for this bad bill, even though they had their doubts.

The public reaction was severe, and the Legislature quickly brought the bill back and repealed it to avoid the wrath of the voters.

That episode belies the notion that members in the caucus can discuss the issues freely and their commitment inside the caucus is not binding.

Recently, when the Legislature failed to pass any kind of Medicaid expansion that would cover 120,000 uninsured Utahns, the House took its vote in the closed Republican caucus, then decided there was no need to bring the matter to a public vote because it was clear that it would be defeated, just by the strength of the Republican opposition.

That was a convenient way of keeping individual votes of Republican caucus members secret, so those legislators do not have to be accountable to the voters when they come up for re-election next fall. —