Gov. Matt Blunt’s Administration has shown us just how little respect for democracy they really have, if they hide, and/or destroy what should be preserved under state laws.
By those actions, it seems that what they really care most about is power and control.

Why should a Republican governor act differently than a Republican White House? The laws are in the books and were ignored.

Just think - if McCaskill had 81K more votes in 2004 the state Republicans would be screaming about this if it were an issue in her administration. They’d be hounding media to report on the story and tout the failures and bias of “liberal” newspapers.

If Scott Eckersley did actually voice his concerns over e-mail retention through the proper channels why was nothing done then? Is this one of the reasons the governor decided not to run for re-election?

Get Serious. While it may be a good thing to do, with all the other problems facing us, this doesn’t even show on my priority list.

$540,940 to retrieve some emails? Five hundred, forty thousand, nine hundred and forty dollars – For. Some. Email. Logs.

So that’s how a Governor under investigation says F..k You.

It is important in the context that open government is very important to me. This e-mail issue is just one branch of the open government tree.

#3 “with all the other problems facing us, this doesn’t even show on my priority list”

I agree that this issue should not be on our radar. Open government should be a given. However, who knows what other problems would could be facing because we have this tiny faction that refuses to open/maintain their records? Things that have yet to be uncovered? It is through Sunshine Law and FOIA requests that reporters and other interested parties get the information on issues that could be problematic.

I think the real issue in this discussion is whether the Governor’s office (or any other public office) should be put into a position to have the opportunity or ability to arbitrarily decide whether or not to save a piece of official correspondence–be it email or conventional mail. Conventional mail can probably be more easily destroyed than email. (Doesn’t email leave some sort of retrievable trail?)

Over the years, before email, I’m sure several pieces of conventional, official correspondence were quietly disposed of in the circular file.

Perhaps we need to establish a safeguard in the system that will appoint an independent governmental office to copy and file all incoming correspondence (both conventional and electronic) before it is allowed to hit the desk of its recipient.

More red tape? Yes, but if it’s an important concern among constituents, maybe it’s worth the cost and effort.

The problem is that email can be erased in such a way that it *does not* leave a retrievable trail. This makes it more problematic than conventional mail in that it doesn’t physically pass through as many “hands” thus there are fewer (if any) people to attest to its existence. We’ve been through all this with the Bush emails which were on backup and were “accidentally” erased (yeah, right!).

Unfortunately, no seated high-level government official will allow any correspondence, paper or electronic, to be read by anyone but themself for security reasons. This is valid but how to make sure that correspondence is not destroyed or changed in some way is still problematic. There are definitely ways to do it but the current administrations, both on federal and state levels must agree to it. Therein lies the “roadblock” so-to-speak.

Matt Blunt once emailed me a story about his sexual liasons with an intern….I was aghast because I never thought any politician would ever do something like that!!

The nerve of these people…….

#8 — I don’t know where you got your info, (or if you are being disingenuous) but most assuredly, Matt Blunt does not read his own email, other than his personal email, or that screened by administrative assistants. Very few ‘high-seated government officials” do.

Other departments most assuredly do retain their correspondence of all kinds under a stated heirarchial schedule. (Some items have to be kept for X years; some items are required to be kept forever. ) This is reasonable; think about your own correspondence. A grocery list just needs to be kept until the shopping is done; your IRA records should be kept until you die, and great-grandma’s letters to her husband in the Civil War might make it into a book someday.

This is why it is unwise for me to email XXOOs to my husband at work . Email are state business and they are public records — you write with that in mind, and that someone else may read them when they are archived. On the other hand, an email correspondence Q/A is much easier to keep than paper copies of everything.

The hassle with Blunt is: he is alleged not to have kept his government records straight from his political records. It’s just like Steelman is nickel and diming every official over their vehicle use (which can be hard to tease apart — if you are coming back to Jeff City after an official trip, and make a slight detour to pick up bread and milk (a personal errand) is of a whole nother level than if you take a state limo on a political tour of the state.) When is the governor NOT being political?

The absurdity of having 43 email addresses, (a half dozen, I might understand, but 43?) and to attempt to CHARGE an investigative committee a half million dollars of state time to continue their investigation sounds suspicious to me. If he has nothing to hide, why try to quash an investigation on the basis of price? (Which also could be seen as a political ploy.)

Young Mr. Matthew is bumbling out of office, and leaving a trail which may render him unelectable statewide in the future. I feel sorry for Melanie and Branch.