Category: government transparency

Categories
government transparency

Yes, Virginia, There Is a Nebraska

Government transparency is understandably popular. Voters want to know what their governments are doing.

So smart politicians promise us more transparency, more sunshine, more info. But, being politicians, sometimes they don’t deliver. And, when they do, they often spend a whole lot more than necessary.

That’s what is happening in Virginia. Bills to put the state budget online have passed both chambers of the legislature — unanimously.

But politicians estimate that the cost to get the job done will run over $3 million. Wow. That’s a lot. How does that compare with other states?

At the Tertium Quids blog, there’s a letter posted from Ed Martin, chief of staff to former Missouri Governor Matt Blunt. Martin points out that two years ago Blunt created the Missouri Accountability Portal by executive order.

The website is a national model with a searchable database of state expenditures. It’s garnered over 17 million hits from interested citizens. And it cost less than $200,000.

Then there’s Nebraska State Treasurer Shane Osborn. As the Washington Examiner recently reported, he put Nebraska spending online without the legislature passing a law. He just did it.

“I used my staff to compile the data,” Osborn said. “I just viewed it as my job.”

The grand cost of Osborn’s excellent transparency website? Only $38,000.

Sounds like there are millions of reasons for Virginia to learn from others.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
government transparency

Transparent Obama

You may have heard about Barack Obama’s desire for greater transparency in government. Policy will now favor ready revelation, he has said. No more unnecessary dark secrets about governmental doings.

As a U.S. senator, Obama made a few plausible gestures in support of greater openness about the legislative process. So I have been guardedly optimistic about his commitment to transparency as our new president.

President Obama has promised to post legislation online for public viewing before he signs it. However, the very first bill he signed, which expands the right to sue over alleged pay discrimination, was not posted online.

Recovery.gov page, early February
Recovery​.gov page, early February

An administration spokesman alluded to mysterious difficulties preventing this. Apparently, one is not allowed to be transparent about the obstacles to transparency. Okay, so maybe it just slipped through the cracks.

But what more urgent test can there be of the president’s commitment to transparency than the trillion-​dollar “stimulus” spending package Obama is touting? Why not make it easy for all Americans to scan the dirty details before it’s too late to scream at congressmen to try to stop it?

The question answers itself, but let’s visit the recovery​.gov Web page.

There we are told: “Check back after the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to see how and where your tax dollars are spent.”

You know, after it’s too late.

The only thing transparent here is this maneuver.

This Is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Accountability government transparency

Opaque Transparency

Colorado’s state treasurer, Cary Kennedy, is on the hot seat. When running for office, she promised to make the state’s spending more transparent. She has not followed through.

In a different age, such dilatoriness might have been overlooked. Today, the very medium that makes it easy to report what is happening with taxpayers’ money, the Internet, also makes it easy to pressure delinquent officials.

There are websites. The one calling Kennedy to account is a blog called Colorado Spending Transparency. Or COST.

COST recalls that during his 2006 campaign for Colorado State Treasurer, Kennedy observed that when you buy groceries, the receipt shows what you bought. Kennedy, too, she said, would “show you where your money goes.”

Colorado does post its annual budget online. But the COST blog wants a detailed, searchable database, as fifteen other states have provided.

Representative Don Marostica, who also championed transparency in his 2006 campaign, introduced a bill to require such online itemizing. The bill never made it out of committee. Marostica had planned to re-​introduce the bill until Governor Ritter stated in a recent speech that he would work with Treasurer Kennedy and others to put the state’s checkbook online.

COST says doing this will only reveal what the state paid, not necessarily what it paid for. COST wants the whole story. And will keep pressing until it gets it.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
government transparency

Change So Far

President Barack Obama promised change … including in the way Congress did things. As a senator, he sponsored a transparency bill that — if Congress could only have stuck with after passing — would have publicized all proposed pork.

And there’s the rub. Congress is constitutionally in charge of change, really. You might say “change” is Congress’s job: New things for government are supposed to come from Congress in the form of legislation. Not from the president.

So how has Congress helped? Well, as I’ve reported before, the new Congress has indicated pretty clearly what kind of change it wants: A stronger stranglehold on power and a narrow purview of options to be considered.

None of this represent the kind of change Americans want … or Obama promised.

The most interesting procedural proposals come, these days, from the minority Republicans.

Opposing the developing Democrat bailout package (that spends more trillions we don’t have), House Minority Leader John Boehner asked that no so such bill be “brought to the floor of the House unless there have been public hearings in the appropriate committees, the entire text has been available online for the American people to review for at least one week, and it includes no special-​interest earmarks.”

Veteran Washington reporter Cokie Roberts called Boehner’s proposal “delightful.”

Delightful it is, and in Obama’s spirit, too, but it’s up to Congress to deliver.

So far, no good.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
government transparency term limits

Committee Chair Limits, RIP?

Advocates of limited government have lamented the decline and fall of the 1994 Republican “revolution” since, well, not long after the so-​called revolution began. But before it melted into a puddle of politics-​as-​usual, there were some serious efforts at reform.

One procedural reform that survived was term limits on committee chairmen. The Democratic leadership, after gaining a majority in 2006, decided to keep these limits.

But now, with their majority increased, a Democrat headed to the White House, and economic collapse as a distraction, they apparently feel the time has become as ripe as a freckled banana to peel away such impediments to their rule. The scuttling of committee chair limits is now part of their new rules package.

The package also limits the ability of Republicans to force votes on bills that would be politically difficult for Democrats to vote on. Sheesh, I thought voting on stuff was the whole idea.

The minority Republicans have sent a letter to Speaker Pelosi, complaining, “This is not the kind of openness and transparency that President-​elect Obama promised.”

But they shouldn’t stop there, even if the new rules are implemented over their protest. In politics, it often pays to keep fighting.

Term limits remain very popular with the many of the same voters who also like the openness and accountability the new president keeps talking about.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
government transparency

The Wizard of Fraudz

Every time the economy takes a nose-​dive, we roust up a few frauds and a bevy of humbugs.

This outing’s big villain is financier Bernard Madoff. For decades, Madoff made off with billions of other people’s money by pretending to invest it honestly.

Instead, he paid off early “investors” with the “investments” of later “investors.” To keep the Ponzi scheme going, Madoff had to keep widening the circle of the victims — which meant that he and his boosters had to keep whispering sweet cryptic nothings to awestruck big-​pocketed individuals eager to join an exclusive club.

Some prospects declined. They now say they could get no real information about how he was investing. What? Oracular pronouncements weren’t enough for these skeptics?

Another Delphic entity that pretends to “invest” our money is the federal government. Its masterminds, too, claim to know everything about doing financial magic — but explain nothing. The Federal Reserve, for example, is refusing to comply with media requests for info on the “emergency loans” now being handed to ailing companies.

America’s government officials “know,” somehow, that they can “invest” in decrepit, floundering, washed-​up firms and industries, using money siphoned from actually productive enterprise, while always paying off old government debt with new government debt, adding up to trillions … and somehow everything will turn out all right.

Pay no attention to those men behind the curtain!

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.