When looking at the current fight between the state auditor and the Legislature over the audit issue, a nugget from Lin Manuel Miranda’s smash Broadway hit “Hamilton” rings in my head.
In the second act tune “The Room Where it Happens,” while closed off from a secret meeting between Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, Aaron Burr muses, “No one really knows how the parties get to ‘Yes’/The pieces that are sacrificed in every game of chess/We just assume that it happens/But no else is in the room where it happens.”
So, state legislators, I’m asking the question: Why are you so reluctant to let us in the room where it happens? Why are you so content with the rest of us just assuming the way governance occurs?
Granted, your position essentially exists based on the idea that those who put you in office are illustrating a certain level of trust to act on their behalf. But that trust, even among the most ardent believers in a benevolent government, isn’t unlimited. And, given the outcome of the vote that propelled the audit issue even further, for many, that limit has already been reached.
Massachusetts voters in the November 2024 state election overwhelmingly supported an audit of the state Legislature. Nearly three out of every four of your constituents were in favor of the state auditor — and by extension the constituents themselves — a deeper and clearer look into your operations.
Now, I know the public argument in opposition states that allowing the state auditor, who is a member of the executive branch of the state government, that oversight would be a constitutional violation, specifically related to the separation of powers.
This argument would hold more water, however, if the auditor was appointed by the governor. The auditor is an independently elected position. Sure, there’s a political nature involved in this structure as well, but the risk of the governor attempting to use the auditor position or the threat of an audit as a tool of persuasion or influence is much smaller. Ultimately, I’d think that would be the biggest concern when invoking the separation of powers argument.
I’ll readily admit that an audit would have limits and the work of elected officials and their effectiveness is very much subjective, however, there is a something to be said for people having a better understanding of the Legislature’s processes, distribution resources and prioritization of issues and initiatives.
On the outside looking in, as the vast majority of taxpayers are, it looks like the Legislature is happy to hide behind the vagueness in the state’s Constitution. The fact of the matter is the public has had very little insight into what the Legislature has been up to and the political supermajority that exists and the lack of new blood overall has contributed to what amounts to a political smokescreen and the perception that the Legislature’s message is, “Don’t worry about what we’re doing; we know what’s best.”
It’s in the best interest of the commonwealth to have an informed electorate and how can we have that when the Legislature won’t let us in the door, so to speak?
The Legislature is very much painting itself as the Wizard of Oz, telling us to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. The longer its members maintain this fight, the more the public is going to seek not just to peek behind the curtain, but to think long and hard about why they’re fighting so hard to keep it closed.
