OTOH, ensuring our representatives are 100% beholden to us also means screaming in the next primary about every bipartisan deal made.

Which has the net effect of decreasing the ability to reach nobody-is-happy compromises.

Which is something else people say they want.

I'm unconvinced that private, smoke-filled backrooms don't have an essential place as the grease that keeps things running well.

> I'm unconvinced that private, smoke-filled backrooms don't have an essential place as the grease that keeps things running well.

I hear that, and there's a case for it. Diplomacy, maneuvering and negotiation require secrets and enclaves.

So to allow for that you need a few things;

  -  Strict official records of affairs

  -  Strong penalties for fraud, malinfluence, intimidation

  -  Whistleblower protection

The last of these essential checks-and-balances has gone to shit our culture. Even if we pardoned Edward Snowden and made him a "hero of democracy" tomorrow, it's still a mountain of work to restore the essential sense of civic responsibility, patriotism and duty that allows those people who discover or witness corruption to step-up and challenge it safe in the knowledge that the law and common morality are on their side.

Billions (the tv show), of all places, made a somewhat similar argument in favor of post-hoc investigations, in the last episode.

Record and share everything immediately = no room for deals

Record nothing = too much room for corruption

So we land at... record everything + only review with just cause + strict whistleblower protections.

Which seems a nice splitting of the matter, but requires a strong, independent third party (e.g. judicial branch) to arbitrate access requests. With tremendous pressure and incentives to breach that limit.

Many governments do have laws like this, called "sunshine laws". Enforcing them can be difficult though, and often enough they fail to achieve the transparency that is their goal while also substantially hindering process.