a Better Bubble™

Aggregator

Puerto Rico may roll back transparency just when it matters the most

1 hour 27 minutes ago

When the U.S. Navy quietly reactivated Roosevelt Roads Naval Station in Puerto Rico earlier this year, the move stirred both anxiety and hope. While some residents saw the promise of new jobs, others saw it as a painful reminder of past harms from the American military presence on the island.

Whatever their views, Puerto Ricans — and Americans everywhere — deserve basic answers about what the military is up to as tensions escalate with Venezuela. They should know whether Puerto Rico’s government is coordinating with the Pentagon and whether their concerns are being taken into account. And of course, there are countless local issues having nothing to do with international conflicts that Puerto Ricans are entitled to be informed about.

But at the very moment when transparency is most essential, Puerto Rican lawmakers are trying to slam the door shut. Senate Bill 63, a major rewrite of the island’s transparency law, was recently rushed through the legislature with little public input. It weakens the public’s right to know at every turn.

SB 63 would undermine transparency

Puerto Rico’s existing transparency law, passed in 2019, already faces serious problems. Recently, for instance, the American Civil Liberties Union of Puerto Rico sued to uncover records about how the territory’s transportation agency shared confidential driver’s license information with federal immigration officials, which may have violated local laws.

SB 63 would make it even harder for the public to know what government officials are doing. The bill significantly extends the deadline for responding to records requests, more than doubling it in some cases. For time-sensitive investigations, especially by journalists, these delays could bury relevant information or make it irrelevant or obsolete, crippling efforts to expose the truth.

This bill will also make it harder for the public to understand the information they do receive. Today, requesters can ask for information in easy-to-analyze formats, like statistics or spreadsheets. SB 63 would eliminate that right, making it harder to find specific information that’s of the most use to the public.

In addition, SB 63 would require agency heads to be alerted to every single records request. This change injects politics into what should be a straightforward process. At the federal level, both Democrats and Republicans have used similar review systems to conceal politically inconvenient information.

What’s more, SB 63 would also require agencies to withhold records that any judge has previously deemed confidential, even if that ruling came from a single lower court and was never reviewed or affirmed. But judges get things wrong all the time — that’s why their rulings are not precedential and are subject to appellate review. Under SB 63, a single questionable decision from a single judge could lock in secrecy indefinitely.

SB 63 would leave Puerto Ricans and all Americans less informed

Puerto Rican lawmakers seem to know SB 63 would be unpopular. The Senate approved it without a public hearing, and the House allowed just one day of testimony, during which many entities were shut out. It’s not an accident that an anti-transparency bill was pushed through with as little transparency as possible.

The timing couldn’t be worse — and not only because Puerto Rico seems to be one of the main platforms for U.S.-projected interventions in Venezuela. As Puerto Rico faces deep challenges in housing, education, and climate, reducing access to information will only exacerbate existing problems.

The need for local transparency is heightened exponentially by Puerto Rico’s colonialism. Public records are essential for understanding issues such as failures in hurricane relief by federal and local authorities, collaboration between local agencies and federal immigration officials, and the impact of federal policies on the territory’s schools and colleges.

In addition, cuts to federal Freedom of Information Act offices are already making it harder for Puerto Ricans to obtain information from Washington. If local transparency is also weakened, oversight and accountability will become virtually nonexistent.

Fortunately, Puerto Ricans refuse to be silent. More than 50 civil society organizations, along with community and academic leaders, have urged Gov. Jenniffer González Colón to veto SB 63 because the legislation is bad for Puerto Rico’s citizens, businesses, and democracy itself.

Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) also joined other press freedom organizations in a letter led by the Committee to Protect Journalists, calling on her to reject the bill.

Puerto Rico can’t afford to be left in the dark. SB 63 dims the light of transparency precisely when we need it the most. Gov. González should reject SB 63 and stand unequivocally with the people’s right to know.

Caitlin Vogus

Alton Votes 4-3 To Force Ameren Powerline Relocation

2 hours 49 minutes ago
ALTON – Alton city officials narrowly voted on Wednesday to force Ameren Illinois to relocate powerlines a local business owner has consistently called a public safety hazard . City Council members voted 4-3 to pass a resolution invoking Section 4.2 of the city’s Franchise Agreement with Ameren to “relocate Electric Facilities for Public Safety.” Aldermen Chris Bohn, Martha Pfister, Michael Velloff, and John Meehan voted in favor of the item, while Aldermen Rosetta

Updated Mo & St. Louis City Candidate Qualifications, Requirements

4 hours 19 minutes ago
2026 is an election year. In Missouri, State Auditor and all US House of Representative seats are up. In St. Louis City, there’s an election for State Senator (open seat due to term limits); all State House seats; County offices of Collector of Revenue, License Collector, Recorder of Deeds; Board of Alders President and all … Continue reading Updated Mo & St. Louis City Candidate Qualifications, Requirements →
mceselski

Menopause and Cardiovascular Disease: Is There a Connection?

5 hours 28 minutes ago
Key Takeaways Studies show that early menopause can increase the risk of heart disease in women. When estrogen levels drop during menopause, it can lead to higher cholesterol, blood pressure and body fat levels. Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death among women of all ages. Hormone replacement therapy is an option to discuss with your health care provider. Early menopause (menopause that occurs before age 45) has been found to increase the risk of heart disease.