The Instigator
Lookingatissues
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
yellown
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

Should elected officials be allowed to seal their records/ papers

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
yellown
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/16/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 672 times Debate No: 71769
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)

 

Lookingatissues

Pro

Should officials be allowed to have their records/ papers, sealed
People who are in public office or running for elected or appointed office shouldn't be allowed to seal their records from the public. The records and papers of people who are asking for the citizens to place their trust in them shouldn't be afraid of what their records and papers might reveal and instead should be proud of what they've written or done in the past and want people to know about these things. The citizens should be able to review their records which would shine a light on who these people really are and whether they're who they claim to be, therein lies the rub, perhaps these people who are asking for the people's trust, don't deserve it and the politicians know it..
yellown

Con

According to DDO protocol I shall use this initial round for acceptance. Just to clarify, I shall be arguing the case that elected officials have the right to seal their papers/records.

May the best Hominid win! (Unless you are a double-leg amputee, in which case my condolences).
Debate Round No. 1
Lookingatissues

Pro

Only predators, thieves, and politicians to whom darkness and subterfuge are their best friends like to practice their trade and prefer to remain anonymous but those who have asked the citizens to place their trust in them have a obligation to reveal anything that would reveal their history and who they really were.
Politicians not being permitted to have their records and papers sealed would shine a light on them. As U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once said," Sunlight is the best disinfectant..." While it may be presently legal for politicians to seal their records and papers from public view it isn't to the benefit of the country nor its citizens to permit public officials to seal their records and papers for twenty or thirty years from public scrutiny .What do politicians have to hide, wouldn't the country be better ran if the citizens knew.
yellown

Con

An elected official (eg Polititian) has the job to look after and represent the interests of their people.

This is not always compatable with full accountability, as for national security reasons some sensitive dcuments may have to be 'sealed' to avert catastrophe and to allow the nation to acheive its foreign policy interests more effectvely.

Therefore an elected official might be dong a better job if they do 'seal' some of the records from their time in office, for 20 or 30 years as you stated (foreign policy issues can last a very long time). This is why defence organisations such as the CIA in the USA generally have files that remain private (concerning 'elected officials').


Debate Round No. 2
Lookingatissues

Pro

" Character is what you do when you think no one will find out what you did...."
" It is easy to appear to have good character when others are around, but it is what you do when no one is there that really defines your character...."
Ronald Reagan once said,"Trust, but verify...."
The citizens are entitled to know and should know about a person who is asking for the voters to trust them. and when that person has their records and papers sealed a red flag goes up indcating that that person isn't exactely who they're claiming to be. Wouldn't it be a easy matter ,for instance if when a robber or a embezzler was caught, all anyone would have to do is ask them,did you do it, and they would immediately give you a reply that you could be assured was the truth.
No one woud accept these people's word as to their guilt. But when it comes to politicians we not only accept that they are who they present themseves to be we permit them to seal up evidence that would actually reveal the truth about them. When one thinks about the general run of politicians they are not shy about letting the world know of their accomplishments and publicly tout them but strangly, they wish to hide some aspects of their past by having their papers and records sealed from the public.
Now some politicians have used other methods of dealing with records and papers that might reveal to the public what they had done and who they were, for instance, Sandy" Berger was the Assistant to the President Bill Clinton, for National Security Affairs from 1997 to 2001 who later absconded with records from the National Archieves and destroyed them.
There are other methods of hiding information about a public figure and its used quite often, to the politicians benefit, that method ,"sanitization," .....The traditional technique of redacting confidential material from a paper document..." But who makes the decisions on what printed material should be subject to "Sanitization, redacted, from the printed records material, is it done by a committee from both political parties or is it done by those with the most to lose if certain information was available to the public.
If printed records, the material that is subject to ""Sanitization," by the political party who's records are being "blacked out, thus denying public scrutiny, isn't this the same as removing evidence about a robber or embezzler and just taking their word whether they were guilty or not.
yellown

Con

I don't deny anything you have posted, but repeat my previous statements that for the greater good of the citizens the polititians represent, some records may need to be sealed (for national security). I don't deny that in general records should be open to the public, but it can be in the public interest to have them remain sealed.

You have failed to refute my previous argument and I have provided a counter-example to yours. To win this debate you need to demolish it.
Debate Round No. 3
Lookingatissues

Pro

Lookingatissues forfeited this round.
yellown

Con

yellown forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Lookingatissues

Pro

Lookingatissues forfeited this round.
yellown

Con

Apologies for forfeiting previous round.

I have countered pro's arguments and they have failed to counter mine.

Vote con!
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Lookingatissues 2 years ago
Lookingatissues
The people elected to office by the voters after assuming and holding office for some period of time become convinced that the business of the citizens is best left to them in the belief that the common citizen doesn't have the ability to comprehend what is really in their best interests and the less they are informed about them personally and their transactions the better government functions.
Louis Brandeis once said,""sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants" A government ran by stealth by officials who seal their papers and records from public view is a government ran by would-be tyrants and despots who hide behind the stature of their office.
"One of the common failings among honorable people is a failure to appreciate how thoroughly dishonorable some other people can be, and how dangerous it is to trust them." Noam Chomsky (1928
Posted by Lookingatissues 2 years ago
Lookingatissues
This debated subject ," Should elected officials be allowed to seal their records/ papers ...." seems so obvious as to the logic of not allowing Public officials to seal their records and papers from the public that it falls in the same illogical thought by a business that a business didn't need to keep records or have a book keeper.
Having records allows the business as well as the IRS and stock holders, to confirm what the business reported was true and accurate
The public which votes for government representatives to run the countries business also needs to verify that what those officials report is true and accurate as well and the only way to do that is to not allow the records and papers of our officials to be sealed so these records and their papers are available for public scrutiny.
Posted by Lookingatissues 2 years ago
Lookingatissues
The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.
Quote of Patrick Henry
Posted by Lookingatissues 2 years ago
Lookingatissues
Quis custodiet custodes... " The quote "Who watches the watchmen" is roughly translated from the latin phrase ""Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" "Who will guard the guards?" or "Who shall watch the watchers themselves?" The phrase was originally in "The Republic" by Plato "
The truth of the Greek Quote above explains why the citizens of this country are faced with a government that to them is a highly secret stealth operated government.
No one is able to check on those we hired to watch over the governments handling of its affairs. The Citizens haven't any method available to them presently to watch the Watchman, our government and its minions.
A government under the control of liberal, 60s style leftists who control what information about its operatives records and papers are released to the public , the results is that those who should know, the citizens, are kept from knowledge that they are entitled to and should know about their government and its members. The quote, About the enemy within pretty well explains what is wrong with America's government , "The enemy within..."
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague."
Marcus Tullius Cicero by:
(106-43 B.C.) Roman Statesman, Philosopher and Orator
Posted by Miner1 2 years ago
Miner1
Why would anyone disagree with you! No debate hear, unless fake.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by simonstuffles 2 years ago
simonstuffles
LookingatissuesyellownTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con provided an instance where it would not be beneficial, negating Pro's BoP. Pro then just reiterated his previous points. Con had less forfeits. Pro's grammar was lacking, and his spelling was inconsistent. No sources were used.