In fighting for open records, don't lose sight of the fact that the business of government is the people's business

In the 32 years I've worked in news, we've moved 12 times. Which means we've never been in a place long enough to settle into a church where our daughter might get married, buy a burial plot, or master the FOI, public records and public meetings laws of any state or district.

But I have arrived at some beliefs that apply to open government issues:

1. Far more useful, secret, high-impact information is obtained by a reporter without brandishing the law than by doing so. A reporter's integrity, passion and trust are more effective in getting information than a shelf of statute books.

2. I operate on the simple idea that government business is the people's business. The press acts for the people in obtaining information from and about government.

3. The best form of government in the world today is an open democracy, where skeptical review of government is not only tolerated but embraced.

4. Virtually every state has laws on public records and meetings. For the press, those laws represent starting points, not limits. Most laws begin with lofty principles, and proceed to a list of meetings and records exempt from openness. Texas' records law has 23 exemptions, and they include the irrational and the ludicrous.

5. A journalist's impulse should be to publish, not conceal. Our role is not to serve as a passive conduit for information deemed "publishable." Our role is not to "negotiate differences" nor to compromise and bargain. We operate at a severe disadvantage to those in government. They are the keepers of the information and we are not. They have the power of subpoena, to summon grand juries, to take sworn depositions and to enforce regulatory action. We have no right except that granted every citizen.

6. When in the past the keepers of secrets have told us that damage would occur if we published information, the fears almost never have panned out. We have been told that people would kill themselves, and they haven't; that national security would be damaged, and it was not; that revealing secret donors would dry up philanthropy, and it did not; that thieves wouldn't be caught, and they were. All of that strengthens our resolve to publish.

7. Lawyers are our allies as well as our adversaries, and they can be useful in decision-making. But they are not journalists and they should not be newsroom decision-makers. The judgment of what is news is an editor's. A lawyer's role is to advise on the law, precedents, behavior of courts, and to rate the risk and outcomes of alternative actions. For those in government, I suggest the same approach: Officials should make the decisions. The best decisions by government follow an instinct for openness, not an instinct for limiting disclosure to only that which a lawyer says is required.

8. You will never find me arguing for government secrecy, but the passion of my opposition will vary according to what I believe is the level of abuse. Experience tells me to challenge the practice of a public board going into executive session to discuss litigation, land acquisition or personnel matters. Experience tells me that "litigation" is a much-abused cover for politicians to hash out controversial public issues in darkness; that a meeting to discuss property, which theoretically needs to be done in secret to avoid escalating land costs, is a much-abused cover for deals between politicians and connected land owners; that a "personnel" meeting is a much-abused cover to conceal one hell of a mess going on in some school or government agency.

9. The press should be restrained in its threats to sue. But once made, the threat should always - always - be carried out, unless the response to the threat is adequate. A newspaper need only bring suit a couple of times before compliance levels rise. Collaterally, the first court of resort for resolving issues of secrecy is not a court of law. The first is the court of public opinion, with a newspaper hammering away at the secrecy. If the people think the newspaper has poor grounds, government will hear hardly a murmur, nor will we. And perhaps we will be chastened.

10. The press's best defense against government secrecy is the reader's credence, growing out of a belief that the press is acting in the public interest. A good defense also requires a strong offense: The press should push every legislative session to open meetings and records. Texas' 23 exemptions could be reduced to four or five.

The best public relations people in government are those who see as their bosses the people - taxpayers and citizens - and believe passionately that their role is to get information to those citizens. This is not easy. Yet, people who care about the process and open government must explain that the fleeting pain of bright sunlight is nothing compared to surgically revealed secret. And it is the noble official, indeed, who puts service to the citizen before self-interest.

Oppel, treasurer-elect of ASNE and co-chair of The American Editor Committee, is editor of the Austin (Texas) American-Statesman.