The 2006 Idaho Legislature is still more than a month away, and legislators are already conducting the people’s business behind closed doors.

An interim committee assigned to make recommendations on state employee pay recently jumped at the chance to iron out major new legislation privately, rather than before an audience of state officials, employees, lobbyists and reporters. On a motion by state Sen. Joe Stegner, R-Lewiston, all but one legislator approved the partisan meetings and scurried off – with the Republicans shutting the doors behind them.

State Rep. Jana Kemp, R-Boise, was the lone lawmaker who refused to endorse part of the governmental secrecy, remaining at her committee seat in protest, according to reporter Betsy Russell of The Spokesman-Review. In arguing against Stegner’s motion, she said, according to Russell, “I believe that the issue of employee pay is a nonpartisan issue, and as such, I would propose that we conduct all business here in the interim committee.”

Defying polls that show Idahoans overwhelmingly want open government, legislators continue to embrace secrecy. Earlier this year, the Idaho Senate joined the House by voting 3-to-1 to give committees the power to close meetings for any reason on a two-thirds vote. Four of the five Republican North Idaho senators sided with the majority – Sens. Joyce Broadsword, Mike Jorgenson, John Goedde and Dick Compton. North Idahoans should hold their representatives accountable for this shameful way of conducting their business.

Kemp has given the North Idaho delegation an example to emulate when controversy tempts them to shut out their constituents.

What’s the big deal about conducting committee and subcommittee meetings in public? Most of the real work on legislation occurs at the committee level. Testimony is heard from experts and the public. Issues are discussed at length. Pros and cons about bills are argued. By the time legislation reaches the Senate or House floor, it has been thoroughly debated. And the public excluded from further discussion. Closed meetings prevent a thorough understanding of key issues.

Next month, the Idaho Supreme Court will hear arguments in the Idaho Press Club’s 2003 lawsuit against the Legislature to open committee meetings. A lower court has twice ruled that the Legislature has the authority to close all but its general sessions. Win or lose the case on appeal, top lawmakers are feeling pressure to temper their unprincipled stand. A new nonpartisan organization, Common Cause, plans to lobby the next Legislature to change its practice, after learning from a poll that 95 percent of its members don’t believe lawmakers should be allowed to close committee meetings on a two-thirds vote.

Idaho, Nevada and Wyoming are the only Western states that allow legislative committees to close meetings for any reason.

House Speaker Bruce Newcomb was so upset that the interim committee seized on the tactic that he sternly warned representatives not to participate in closed meetings of interim or joint committees.

Unfortunately, Newcomb doesn’t share the same passion for doing away with the rule altogether.