This week’s “Daily Journal” guest columnist is Dr. Michael Sanera, John Locke Foundation Director of Research and Local Government Studies.

RALEIGH — In my line of work, I am confronted almost daily with Orwellian terms used by government officials to cover up their odious actions. Budget increases are investments, restricting the use of other people’s land is smart growth, and requiring the use of expensive energy is clean energy.

One of the most insidious Orwellian political terms is “stakeholder.” When used in the business context, it identifies groups and individuals both inside and outside an organization that should be involved in a decision.

Government officials have hijacked the term to cover up a dirty little policymaking secret. For them, “stakeholder” means politically powerful groups that must be consulted before a policy can be adopted. Unless the most powerful special-interest groups agree to support a policy, it will never be approved or implemented. Stakeholders typically impose costs on the parties that have not been represented at the stakeholder meetings.

Politicians and bureaucrats cannot be truthful about catering to powerful special interests. If the public knew that policies truly were decided in this manner, the people would be even more disgusted with the process than they already are.

Depending on the level of government, thousands if not millions of people who would be adversely affected by a policy are excluded consciously from the process. The poor and minorities receive inferior education because powerful teacher union stakeholders ignore them. Environmentalists and planners who drive up housing prices with restrictive land-use policies do not consider the welfare of future homebuyers. Out-of-town rental car and hotel customers are not consulted when local stakeholders want to force nonresidents to pay for their convention centers, sports stadiums, and outdoor amphitheaters.

On a recent trip to Phoenix, I rented a car at the airport and paid 66 percent above the rental rate in city-imposed taxes and fees. Why should Phoenix special interests care? I cannot vote in Phoenix.

To demonstrate this phenomenon, let’s look at a “Wind Energy Stakeholder Perspectives Questionnaire” from the U.S. Department of Energy that I recently received by mistake. I am not a member of one of the powerful special-interest groups that the DOE isinterested in polling.

The goal of the questionnaire is to “better understand which wind energy development issues are most important to specific stakeholder [read: special-interest] groups.” The first item asks respondents to identify their stakeholder group. The usual and obvious suspects are all present: municipal policymaker, county policymaker, state policymaker, federal agency, regulatory agency, wind energy advocate, wind industry member, power sector — not wind energy, agriculture sector, project neighbor (someone who lives near a wind farm), landowner with windy land (I assume this means land where strong winds blow?), environmental organization.

Note the groups that are missing because they are not politically powerful, not organized, or unaware that the policy, if implemented, would affect them:

• Taxpayers who will pay higher taxes to subsidize wind energy,

• Electric ratepayers who will pay higher rates to subsidize wind energy,

• Property rights advocates who believe that the Constitution protects private property,

• Low-income people who will pay disproportionately high taxes and electric rates,

• Environmental groups that analyze energy policy from a free-market perspective, and

• Workers in traditional energy industries who will lose their jobs as the result of subsidized competition from wind (coal, oil, hydro, nuclear, etc.).

DOE bureaucrats consciously chose to ignore these individuals, even though they would be affected adversely by wind subsidies. DOE bureaucrats are not concerned about the latter groups. The bureaucrats seek to push a pro-wind agenda. Bureaucrats see no downside by ignoring these individuals.

It’s a shame that this story is repeated day in and day out at every level of government.