Comment on Hillary's Secrecy Compulsion

The emotionally charged tone of my posts yesterday may suggest that I was on a critical bender directed only at my candidate, Barack Obama. As it happens, I also took the time to comment in a public forum on the latest example of Hillary Clinton's astounding propensity to obscure her decision-making from public view.

A story on HuffPo's Off The Bus site described a press conference held by Hillary's campaign in conjunction with the announcement of her healthcare plan. The briefing was intended to provide journalists with access to policy experts from the team that had put it together, presumably to help improve the quality of their coverage by allowing them to ask detailed questions.

The following if an excerpt of Beverly Davis' description of how it began:

[...] before we could start querying the three member panel, the Clinton press handlers attempted to control the spin by announcing, "This will be for background only." That's press-speak for: "It's off the record."

What?

Was this a bad flashback to the secretive Clinton White House years?

[...]

"Why is it [the meeting] background?" asked a testy Dan Balz of the Washington Post, who was sitting next to me.

"Well, unless there's some brilliant quote, we want this to be just background," said Jay Carson, Clinton's National Press Secretary.

"But why? That's why we're here; to find out who these people are and what their contribution has been and is," I chimed in.

"Unless we're going to have a revolt, this will be background," Carson responded coolly.

More grumbling and grousing by Balz and Huffington Post's OffTheBus until Carson relented to our demands that the meeting be on record and the policy team of Neera Tanden, Gene Sperling, and Laurie Rubiner began explaining the finer details of Senator Clinton's latest health care plan for the nation.

This is why I really value Barack's focus on openness and think it is significant that he keeps encouraging a change in politics. It's also the reason why I think we should all push harder to see that his standard is put into practice.

After my previous post on the subject of policy, the Chicago Tribune published a story providing some details about the 200-person network of policy advisers working on the Obama campaign. Why not extend the website to include a list with short bios for this engine of policy development? What better way to underscore the contrast with Hillary Clinton on one of the issues that is central to many people's aversion to her?

Several of the reactions in the comments following the story were dismissive of the knee-jerk secrecy, and went straight to claims of journalistic bias, slander and ad hominem attack. This is the default attack posture of right-wing radio. The press event may have had an adequate resolution this time, but the tendency is a real problem in our politics.

This is the comment that I offered on the site:

SiskoKid and linfar,

I appreciate your feeling that Hillary is a frequent target on this site. I'm personally an Obama supporter, but I understand that the tone of comments about Hillary is often vitriolic.

That said, please do not neglect the issue of secrecy and press handling. This is a CRUCIAL question.

People seriously discussing change in this country are seeking an end to the opacity and deception of the Bush White House. I believe Tinuviel and BevDavis both express this anger in their comments, though they take aim at the press' complacency and complicity in the face of being "handled."

This issue cuts across ALL policy debates. We must all hold the candidates we support accountable for setting a different tone. If we don't demand honesty now, we're not going to get it in 2008.

What's wrong with starting that conference "off the record" is the mindset it betrays. Secrecy for its own sake is a pernicious foe of democracy. It's fine that campaign PR relented in this case, but what might the outcome if the PR had the leverage of the WH behind it?

I'd like to see all campaigns disclose the identities of their policy teams publicly. Why should these decisions ever be made in the shadows?

Defend Hillary's plan and laud her ability, but don't ignore a dangerous tendency in her organization. Ask better of your candidate, so others might be persuaded to join your cause.

posted 05:07 pm on 09/18/2007

Frankly, I don't see Hillary changing her approach to politics anytime soon. That is a real difference between candidates, and it's a crucial strength that we Obama supporters should highlight and the Obama campaign should put into practice at every opportunity.

We must build more concrete examples of what Barack IS doing differently, not just in legislation, not just in speeches, but in the day to day operations of the campaign. As this article illustrates, the contrast will be glaring. Let's make the most of this opportunity to win new supporters by doing the right thing.