Written by Phil Ruggiero Jr.

NOTE: I received this recently from an adoptee in regards to the recent legislation and a question that I posed to him asking him what his thoughts were on the NJ legislation that passed the Senate on December fourth. With his permission, it has been printed here. He makes some excellent points and I hope you will share your thoughts with us as well.

The tenth dimwit reference is to Marley's latest bastardette blog, in which she names and quotes nine enemies of open records in NJ.

Currently, a less than perfect bill for open records awaits consideration in the NJ assembly. The bill, as it now stands, would allow an adult adoptee to get his OBC unless a birthparent (excuse me, original parent) requests that their names be stricken from the information given to the adoptee. In return for this deletion, the original parent must provide a medical history. There was a bill in Maine earlier this year that started out as just a straight open records bill. Modifications were considered to placate the Catholic, ACLU, NCFA and right to life viewpoints. At this point, members of the largest open records group in the country started contacting the Maine legislators, telling them that no compromise was acceptable, that it was a non-negotiable all or nothing issue. It's been my experience in my personal life that when I say all or nothing I wind up with nothing most of the time. So it went in Maine. The same people are now writing to and about the New Jersey Assemblypersons, due to concerns that a watered-down law, rather than the OR or NH models, will serve as a blueprint for future state assemblies including Pennsylvania.

I've written before about these two viewpoints. Open records is a civil right.