Democracies die behind closed doors

I completely agree that a democracy dies behind closed doors. By definition, a democracy is a “government by the people”. Whether a direct or representative democracy, a closed-door meeting is typically associated with private or sensitive information, which is being intentionally and selectively withheld from the people. As with the media in today’s society, selective information is not always accurate information. A true democracy should be transparent and have no need for closed doors, especially when making decisions directly affecting the people.
It is my belief that most, not all, politicians are sneaky, weak, and corrupt if given the opportunity. Closed-door meetings fuel the potential for this to happen, shielding their discussions and actions from the very people that elected them or in which they represent. You also have interest groups that make deals with politicians, which in-turn may not be the best representation of the people, but benefit the specific group while putting money in the politician’s pockets. Also, in Texas, there are many wealthy people with a vast reach into the pockets of their elected officials. If the elected officials want re-election funds, they will vote for the views of their highest contributors, which again, typically do not represent the majority of society.
In 1972, the attempt to revise the Texas Constitution by forming a constitutional committee of legislators to draft the new constitution failed; in my opinion, due to the fact that the committee was comprised of legislators whom were not elected by the public. Had this committee been created by the public and the proposed constitution been presented to the voting public to approve or disapprove; then the almost 100 year old document might have been revised successfully. This was in part due to the closed-door meetings that were filled with interest group persuasions.
Compared to other U.S. states, the governor of Texas has limited powers and is, in fact, a weak