No place for virtual governance
Using his emergency powers, Gov. Ned Lamont has been able to make changes to state laws that would have been politically impossible under normal circumstances. Many of these changes may prove beneficial in the longterm, and the legislature should consider implementing them permanently.
Virtual governance is not one of them.
As soon as it’s safe, we must return to in-person debate. We need government buildings reopened to the public and politicians back in their seats, directly interacting with their constituents and each other.
At the outset of the pandemic, there was serious concern about how participatory democratic government could continue to function in a manner that was open and transparent, but also safe. Fortunately, in one of his first emergency orders, the governor wisely allowed both state and municipal public agencies to meet virtually.
Executive Order No. 7B set forth common sense rules for virtual meetings, and public agencies have been meeting under these rules for almost three months.
It’s remarkable to think that just a few years ago, virtual meetings wouldn’t have been possible — the technology simply didn’t exist or wasn’t readily accessible to most people. The pandemic hit at a unique point in history, where we now have the ability to conduct almost any business electronically.
Despite a few early stumbles, most public officials have adapted to the virtual format, and some likely now prefer it. In the short-term, virtual meetings were a necessity. Without the governor’s emergency order, governing would have been almost impossible during the acute phase of the pandemic. But as businesses begin to reopen and we shift focus to how to conduct a new sort of normal, we must also resist the urge to trade transparency and accessibility for mere convenience.
Connecticut has one of the more open and accessible state governments in the country. The centerpiece of this is our Capitol complex where, under normal circumstances, an average person can walk in and testify or directly engage in-person with legislators and executive branch officials. Connecticut has a more freewheeling legislative process than other states. Legislative business is less leadership driven — which means fewer backroom deals — and individual lawmakers are more empowered to influence legislation through debate and amendment.
The same is true at the municipal level. Prior to the pandemic, local agencies were required to meet in-person, and the public had a right to be physically present at meetings. This meant members of the public often had the ability to not only testify at public hearings, but also to personally engage with their elected representatives before and after meetings.
The same level of accessibility is simply not possible for virtual meetings.
Electronic communication is no replacement for direct, personal contact. Without physical cues, words are easier to misconstrue and more likely to be interpreted differently than they were intended. For formats where public officials are permitted to participate by audio-only, it’s impossible to tell whether they are even truly engaged in the meeting.
Virtual meetings will also exacerbate many of the problems caused by social media. Social media serves to harden rhetoric. Debate is impersonalized, and political purism is rewarded over the lost art of finding common ground. Comments and conversation tend to be more vicious and mean-spirited. People feel emboldened to say things in ways they would never if conversing in person.
For all the ways technology can make us feel as if we’re connected, it can actually be detrimental to the democratic process.
In recent years, politicians have increasingly become electronically cloistered, talking only to narrow groups of like minded supporters. Social media has created political echo chambers, and a virtual governing environment will make this worse.
The General Assembly will soon reconvene for the first time since the pandemic began. Under the state constitution, the Governor’s executive orders don’t apply to the conduct of the General Assembly — the legislative branch sets its own rules of procedure — and so it remains to be seen the extent to which the legislature will employ technology to debate and vote.
Allowance must obviously be made for the health and safety of both elected officials and the public, but these changes should be temporary and they should maximize meaningful participation by the public. The pandemic must not become an excuse for a permanent retreat behind our computer screens.