UNDER new rules released late last month, journalists who besmirch “the reputation of the House of Representatives, its officials or members” may lose their credentials to cover the chamber.
The “institutional codified rules for media coverage,” says the House Press and Public Affairs Bureau (PPAB), will “give more teeth to the House’s efforts of ensuring a systematic and orderly media coverage that will be beneficial to both the House and the media, and ultimately to the citizenry.”
The press card of a House-accredited reporter, the new rules state, may be revoked “if the bearer besmirches the reputation of the House of Representatives, its officials or members.”
Sadly, the new rules reflect not only the new hostile environment under which journalists must work today, but also the underlying disregard lawmakers have for the Constitution—the basic law of the land—and the role it reserves for a free press in our democracy.
Article III, Section 4 of the Constitution is clear: “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.”
Section 7 of the same article adds: “The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access to official records, and to documents and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for policy development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as may be provided by law.”
In a democracy, the more accurate information people have about the issues, the better equipped they will be to make informed decisions. This is the role filled by a free press. Journalists are duty-bound to seek the truth and report it, and in so doing, give the public the information it needs to make sound decisions.
The new House rules seek to short circuit that function by dictating who may or may not have access to congressional sessions and lawmakers. Similar to the licensing of journalists, this is a form of prior restraint that goes against the very fabric of our Constitution.
It is not the job of journalists to make lawmakers look good. If, in the performance of their duties, they “besmirch” the reputation of some lawmakers, that’s part of the democratic process. Elected officials are accountable for their actions and they cannot dodge that responsibility by cherry picking the journalists who cover them.
Besides, from where we sit, some lawmakers are already doing a great job at besmirching the reputation of the House, so why single out journalists?