The Super Quiet Proceedings of the Supercommittee

Megan Covington
School of Engineering
Class of 2014

With the circus act of Republican presidential contenders and the UARS satellite falling out of the sky this past weekend, the supercommittee responsible for reducing our deficit has predictably commanded little of the nation’s attention. Perhaps another reason the supercommittee has been noticeably absent from the daily news channel lineup is that the most interesting thing its twelve members have done is scurry out of the Capitol building in an attempt to dodge reporters after completing its second closed meeting earlier today.

So it comes as no surprise that this rapid exodus – or rather, the reason behind it – has become the centerpiece of the recent discussion about the supercommittee. Pundits, journalists, and interest groups in particular are concerned about the fact that both meetings held by the committee have been closed to the public. After all, the deficit crisis may be the key crisis our nation faces in this and following decades. With the future of our government and the nation’s economic well-being on the line, many are alarmed by the severe lack of openness in the proceedings.

Yet for all the natural distrust and skepticism of backroom dealings, secrecy is the right policy for the supercommittee members. Responsible for the controversial budget cuts that nobody wants to make and everyone will likely be upset about, these Congressmen – and Patty Murray, who represents what I believe is a much bigger criticism with the supercommittee since she is the only woman involved – need whatever freedom and flexibility of discussion that the safety of a private conference room can provide. The supercommittee members need to be able to focus on the best possible policy decisions for our nation instead of the outside pressure from parties, press, and the people. Without scores of special interests, news outlets, and political commentators judging every proposal, argument, and disagreement, these twelve have a higher probability of coming up with an effective compromise, something that’s becoming increasingly rare in our national legislature.

Those criticizing the lack of public meetings have obviously forgotten that the Constitution, that cardinal accomplishment of the American tradition, was forged in a hot Philadelphia summer with the help of curtains on the windows and a vow of secrecy. The delegates to the constitutional convention recognized the need to insulate themselves from the influence of public opinion, state legislatures, and special interests in order to deliberate soundly and work together to outline a rational and coherent form of government. Whatever criticisms of the document may exist, I believe their strategy worked pretty well.

Today’s supercommittee is even more easily threatened by outside influence. With news reporting around the clock, millions of news websites constantly being updated and accessed, an increasingly polarized congress, and a considerably dissatisfied and distrustful populace, the only way the twelve committee members have any hope of producing a successful plan is through careful proceedings and whatever modicum of isolation private meetings can afford. Even with the doors shut, the supercommittee could fail to come to any kind of decent agreement. After all, those doors hardly block out every influence or pressure on the minds of those involved. And no matter how excellent the proceedings turn out to be, the plan must still gain the support of a majority in both houses, which is likely to be a monumental undertaking. Transparency is generally an excellent policy for any government or governmental agency to adhere to; however, given the severity of the crisis and the nature of the task at hand, supercommittee meetings closed to the public are reasonable, logical, and acceptable.

View article: Supercommittee operating in secret / Politico
Photo courtesy: Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images