Submitted by Brad, Nov 2, 2006 19:10

I have yet to understand why public servants deserve privacy protections in the performance of their public jobs. If you don't want public scrutiny, stay in the private sector. I as an employer and employee manager would not countenance someone in my company denying me to know the details of how they do their job, and believe it or not, the president and vice president are employed by the American people and owe it to us to explain how they did their jobs. Who they talk to and what counsel they give should be a matter of public record, because it impacts public matters, not private matters. Those CEOs and lobbyists are not acting as private citizens, but as players in public policy. It should not be a secret what policies they are advocating. It's not like they're asking Dick Cheney to be the godfather of their children, they are asking him to perform acts that generally benefit themselves and their organizations, and I'm sorry but the public does have a right to know this. The argument that they won't get good counsel is actually more alarming than anything else, as it means that there are people talking to the President and Vice President who would counsel one thing in public and another in private. All of the players in this drama are playing roles representing their institutions and interests (nominally the American people for Bush and Cheney, and BP, Enron, Morgan Stanley, Americans for Tax Reform, etc. for the other side of the fence), not acting as private citizens. It defies logic to see it any other way. It's not like someone is asking them what they had for dinner, what they said to their families, or other personal and private matters. It's really pretty crystal clear I think.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.