Are Public Hearings Rigged?
Why Do We Do Public Hearings This Way?
Have you ever sat through a public hearing and thought, Who came up with this system? Well, I have. So naturally, I did what any civic nerd would do: I dug into history. Spoiler alert- if you know anything about British history, it’s exactly as you’d expect.
A Trip Back to the 17th & 18th Century: The Great British Land Grab
To understand the roots of public hearings, we need to hop into a time machine and travel back to Great Britain about three hundred years ago. Picture it: the Land Enclosure Act is the hot topic of the day. This controversial legislation aimed to privatize common lands, those shared spaces where communities had grazed livestock, gathered firewood, and grown crops for centuries. What did privatization mean in practice? Wealthy landowners fenced it all off and claimed it for themselves. Convenient, right?
To make this massive land grab look fair, Parliament (you know, the one made up of wealthy landowners) introduced public hearings. These were opportunities for rural communities to share their opinions. Well, kinda sorta. In reality, it was more of a look-how-fair-we-are performance than an actual exercise in fairness.
The “Citizens” Who Could Speak
Here’s how it worked: Only “citizens” were allowed to speak at these hearings. And in 1801, the definition of a citizen was laughably narrow. Basically, you had to own land. That meant the aristocracy, the landed gentry, and a handful of well-off farmers could participate. Everyone else, the poor, women, religious minorities, foreigners, either couldn’t afford land or were legally barred from owning it.
Imagine a small farmer standing up at one of these hearings, pleading, “We’ve used this land for generations. What are we supposed to do now?” The response? “Sorry, mate, only citizens can speak. But feel free to submit your concerns in writing.” Which was rich considering literacy rates in rural areas were abysmal.
Meanwhile, the wealthy landowners droned on about how enclosing the land would make farming more “productive and efficient.” Sure, maybe for them. For the rural poor, it meant losing their homes, their livelihoods, and their way of life.
And here’s the thing: This process wasn’t a bug; it was a feature. Public hearings were designed to protect the interests of those in power. They ticked a box in the legal process where decisions were made long before anyone walked into the room.
The Legacy of the Enclosures
The impact? Enclosures forever changed Britain. They pushed poor families off the land and into overcrowded cities, cemented the economic advantages of the aristocracy, and deepened social divides that still linger today.
But here’s where it gets interesting: The legacy of these early public hearings lives on. OUR public hearings are rooted in this design. Sure, today’s meetings allow anyone to speak, but research shows they’re still dominated by wealthier white men, whether they’re decision-makers, subject-matter experts, or members of the public.
So, What’s Next?
The next time you’re at a public hearing and wondering, Why do we do it this way? remember, the system wasn’t built for fairness. But understanding its roots is the first step to challenging it.
What are your thoughts on modern public hearings? Do they truly give everyone a voice, or is it time for a redesign? Let’s discuss!
