August 15, 2007


From yesterday's trib op-ed about open records:

Among requested exemptions: 911 recordings, autopsy reports, salaries of mid- to low-ranking workers at state-related universities and applications for opening casinos. Says committee Chairwoman Rep. Babette Josephs, D-Philadelphia, "We all understand this is a balancing act, and we're looking to find the right fulcrum."

No refutation in this worthless editorial – what is the Trib’s argument for having these matters become public?

But hey, who doesn’t want their loved one’s autopsy report as part of the public record.

I’m all for open records, well mostly – though more discussion is necessary to solve the problem of open salary access (it’s already hard enough for government to attract the best people) and personal privacy (in matters like the one mentioned above).


From today's PG -

"Our bridge engineers use these numbers to manage our system and help us decide on prioritizing bridge needs," PennDOT Secretary Allen D. Biehler said in a statement accompanying the release. "The numbers should not be viewed as a measure of whether a bridge is safe or not. If a bridge is open, it is safe for travel." Mr. Biehler has said all 54 steel deck truss bridges in the state -- 28 owned by PennDOT and 26 others owned by cities or counties -- will be inspected by the end of November.

Brilliant. Just brilliant. Since the I-35W was open, I guess it was safe for travel.

How do these people get cabinet level positions? Does it require a removal of the brain-mouth filter?

1 comment:

Jonathan Potts said...

Autopsies are not performed everytime someone dies--only if there is a suspicious or accidental death. I can only imagine the horror this must put a family through, but it is in the public's interest in those cases to learn what caused a person's death. Under the law, as it exists now, I believe autopsy records are considered to be open.