Subject: RE: Question for Sept 25: Quality Filters
Owen
I Agree 100% that the public should not have to pay to participate in what should be open meetings. The minimal public testimony and opinion means that public servants at these meetings can receive attitude adjustments in the guise of education. They are exposed to bombardment by propaganda and perverted data that can skew their perceptions and so corrupt their decisions. Denial of public participation is the name of the game in efforts of the corporate world to push policy decision-making into the conference mode.
I know of many invidividuals who could present excellent testimony and insightful opinions were it not for financial limitations. Those who misguide public servants know of this huge resource of unused uncorruptible talent and seek to keep it silent by promoting or even manufacturing the mini-bureaucracies that keep an endless vista of semi-public meetings in front of conscientious but too often narrowly-visioned scientists and public servants.
Date
|