After nearly an hour of debate in the House Rules Committee this morning, the panel decided to send the issue to a subcommittee to be appointed by House Speaker Ben Lujan.
No word yet on who will be on the subcommittee or when exactly it might make a recommendation back to the Rules Committee.
A measure (House Resolution 2) relating to web casting was introduced by Reps. Ken Martinez and Tom Taylor after Rep. Janice Arnold-Jones on Monday ran a rogue web cam from her own laptop in a meeting of the Taxation and Revenue Committee. Some 133 people logged on to watch.
The debate ran the gamut, with those for web casting saying it opens up government and those against it worrying that video could be used for political purposes. More on the debate in tomorrow's paper.
Update, 12:15 p.m.
Arnold-Jones just put out a statement on the Rules Committee's inaction this morning.
"I am extremely disappointed the Rules Committee failed to come to a conclusion about broadcasting legislative sessions," she said in the statement.
"A majority of my constituents are very interested in the action of the legislative and many of us represent areas of the state where it is unreasonable for our constituents to travel hours to attend public meetings on extremely short notice. Broadcasting committee meetings and sessions allow those unable to physically come to the Capital to still be a part of the political process. I commend my colleagues who support HR 2 and hope they continue the fight for more access and transparency."
those against it worrying that video could be used for political purposes.
ReplyDeleteHmmm, video of political discussions by politicians might be used for political purposes? Why, we can't have that! They'll just have to run a disclaimer like studios do at the beginning of DVD commentaries: "The following broadcast from the State Legislature does not represent the beliefs or opinions of the legislators and is for entertainment purposes only. "