Chronicle Editorial

Iowa newspapers retain second amendment mandate with FOIC
     After several months of legalese debate, the flexing of bureaucratic muscle and newspapers across the state in a stalemate with county recorders and the Iowa Department of Public Health, a decision has been made by the Iowa Freedom of Information Council declaring vital records be freely released to newspapers without the threat of jail.
     In mid-September, the Des Moines Register reported instances in which papers began receiving notices, cautioning them against the publication of information obtained from “vital records.” Doing so would have left the publication liable for a $625 fine and/or up to 30 days in jail.
     Without the legalese, the “vital information” that was considered “prohibited” from publishing consists of mainly births, deaths, marriages and divorces, the Register said, at the time.
     The memo to state county recorders read: “You need to immediately stop providing lists of vital records for any purpose,” Melissa Bird, bureau chief of health statistics for the Iowa Department of Public Health wrote. “(The) Public can have access to vital records via the public terminals. The information inspected and copies shall not be published.”
     These “vital records,” as mentioned earlier, could be considered frivolous items. Marriage certificates, divorce certificates and birth and death notices aren’t really sought after by most members of the public, except family members. When it comes to newspapers, specifically rural Iowa, these records serve the function of being an aware neighbor. Knowing who got married or divorced, and who had a child and who lost a loved one serves the intention of providing condolences or congratulations.
     Most importantly, these records can be obtained by anyone, of any age, from the court house with the provided login information from county employees, who are required by federal law to give it to anyone who asks. Their publication in a newspaper is merely a way of taking every record and putting it into one printed document that people are most likely to see.
     According to a recent ruling by the FOIC, newspapers can publish these documents because they are filed by a county recorder.
     The council expressed that the Department of Public Health’s primary intent in lecturing recorders to avoid releasing documents was the threat of an alternate vital records database would be set up, which violates Iowa code. The council further ruled that when these records are processed by the county, they are public; records from the state however, are not, according to code.
     The council and the Department of Public Health have decided to hold a hearing amending the Iowa code, so that newspapers would not have a problem accessing such records again, and clarifies legalese in the prohibition of establishing an alternate records database.
     The news comes as a relief to newspapers in Iowa, as editors no longer must fear penalties for publishing public records, but still, the news is unsettling; the fact that a state code was interpreted in a way that established the press as a competitor with the government shouldn’t dissipate quickly. The press was never intended to compete with the government. In fact, without the government as we know it, the press would cease to operate in the way we know it, too.
     The press is a medium, a middle man of sorts, that absorbs information from professionals, sifts out the jargon, and presents it in context to voters. Without it, readers wouldn’t know who to vote or what’s important.
     The press is not the enemy of the government. They have a mutual relationship with one another. They need each other. Both parties should make a point to remember that.