Q: What does a “secret hold” refer to in the U.S. Senate?
A: For nearly a decade, I have worked to end a bit of business-as-usual in the U.S. Senate. A longstanding policy has allowed lawmakers to anonymously place what’s known as a “hold” on a nomination or legislative item under consideration in the U.S. Senate. Once placed, the item essentially is held hostage under a cloak of anonymity. The secrecy shrouding the procedural maneuver causes inefficiency and unnecessary delays. In some cases, it even sounds the death knell for the item immobilized at the discretion of an anonymous lawmaker. Sometimes, more than one silent objector makes it virtually impossible to figure out who is stalling the people’s business and for what reasons. This lack of transparency and accountability denigrates open government. While I don’t object to the use of a hold as a means to an end, I do find objection with its secrecy. Keeping things in the open ought to build greater confidence in our system of representative government.
Q: Has the Senate finally sounded the death knell to such secrecy?
A: At long last, the U.S. Senate has taken a bold step towards greater transparency. My bipartisan amendment that would require holds to be made public and published in the Congressional Record was approved during debate in March on the Senate-passed lobbying bill. This bill must be reconciled with the lobbying reform package that will pass the U.S. House. However, the Constitution prescribes each legislative chamber to set its own rules. So my holds amendment should not be subject to negotiation. The U.S. Senate has spoken loud and clear. It’s highly regrettable Congress must overcome the tarnished reputation created by unscrupulous influence peddlers and those who fail to live up to the most basic standards of public service. I take seriously my oath of office and conduct my personal business and the people’s business with the integrity Iowans deserve. That’s why I will continue my crusade to make the government more accessible and accountable to the people. Whether it’s sweeping out secrecy in the U.S. Senate or letting the sunshine infiltrate the federal courts, I am committed to making the federal government more effective, transparent and answerable to the American people.
Q: What’s the status of your efforts to allow cameras in the federal courts?
A: The Senate Judiciary Committee recently approved my bipartisan bill that would allow cameras and other electronic media into federal courtrooms. At the discretion of the federal judge on a case-by-case basis, my bill would set a new bar for the judicial branch. Opening up the courts to public consumption via television or other electronic means would foster a greater awareness about the judiciary process and produce a healthier judiciary. It would help people better understand how their government works. The more people know about their government, the better. And the courts should be no exception. That’s why I’ll continue to weed out questionable practices and plow ahead until the seeds of an open, accountable government take root and become entrenched across all branches of the federal government.