RE: State roles in public participation

[Rich Puchalsky <rpuchalsky@att.net>]

Dan Dozier writes:

"And from a state's viewpoint, it is hard to understand why they don't see, at least in the long run, why having sham public involvement programs isn't in the state's interest. Why promise public information and then make it difficult to get? Why create a public involvement program/committee and then shut out participation from interested people?"

Why?  Because if public information was really available, people would start to demand that industry clean up its act, and states are worried that industry would then move out, reducing the tax base.  Because if interested people really could participate, then state politicians wouldn't get campaign contributions from industry, and state regulators wouldn't get revolving door jobs.  Because the people who run most states don't care about the long run, the short run is more personally profitable.