The Republicans in the House of Delegates were a bit short-sighted to have killed a measure requiring recorded votes when a subcommittee acts on a bill.
Would they feel differently if the Democrats were in control? Would Democrats - who backed the measure - feel differently if Republicans were in the minority?

Two years ago, the House voted to change the rules to allow subcommittees to kill legislation, although critics said that bills should not be killed by a few people without a recorded vote. The critics had a good point, if not the majority of votes.

So Del. Kenneth Plum, D-Fairfax, offered an amendment requiring recorded votes when subcommittees meet. Del. Plum argued that, in some cases, as few as two members of a subcommittee could kill a bill and not have to record their actions.

Taxpayers should desire open government from their legislators, and killing a bill in the early morning or late night hours when no one is around hardly constitutes open government.

Delegates can still defeat a bill but, if Del. Plum's amendment had been approved, the votes would be recorded and the delegates would have to answer to the voters. If any delegate votes to kill a bill, certainly he should be able to state sound reasons for his actions.

Politics ebb and flow. It is certainly conceivable that the Democrats will take control of the House of Delegates in the future. Wouldn't the Republicans like to see Del. Plum's amendment approved then?

Regardless of who controls the House, Del. Plum's proposal is an example of openness in government. It should have been approved.