What better celebration of Ada Lovelace Day – celebrating the achievements of women in technology – could we have than to honor the women who are key to the government transparency movement to which technology is so key?  These women are using technology to pry open the doors of government, and are creating a new style of transparency powered by the Internet. By either making more political and spending data available online, facilitating others to do the same, addressing questions that arise in the age of technology or by creating new tools and context to help all of us connect the dots and understand what the data has to tell us, these women are empowering all of us to hold our government accountable in ways we never could before. As I look around to my colleagues, I see a remarkable number of us – too many to really mention in one column. So here are a few: Ryan Alexander became President of Taxpayers for Common Sense in November 2006, after more than seven years of serving on the board. Taxpayers, under her leadership, has become the go-to organization if you want to find out anything about earmarks. She’s had a long history working on behalf of the public interest: in the past 20 years she has worked as a non-profit advocate, litigator, manager, funder and consultant on issues from media policy, election reform, public health policy, transparency, privacy, women’s economic security and citizen participation. You can follow her on Twitter at http://twitter.com/ryanalxndr.

Danielle Brian’s been battling government secrecy for two decades as the Executive Director of the Project On Government Oversight (POGO) — a group that investigates, exposes, and remedies corruption and other misconduct in order to achieve a more effective, accountable, open and ethical federal government. POGO’s investigations have led to major reforms and cuts in wasteful spending in such areas as government secrecy, nuclear security, drug industry influence on health policy, and defense contractor waste and fraud. When she started there – there was no such thing as a fax or even a feeder in the copy machine, let alone the Internet. You can follow her on twitter at http://twitter.com/daniellebrian.

Leslie Harris is the President and CEO of the Center for Democracy & Technology, where she is responsible for the overall vision and direction of the organization and serves as its chief strategist and spokesperson. Under her leadership, CDT has grown significantly, opened a West Coast office and launched an influential Health Privacy Project. Leslie is widely known for her work on policy issues related to civil liberties, new technologies and the Internet including free expression, government and consumer privacy, cyber security and global Internet freedom. She frequently testifies before Congress and federal agencies, is a regular contributor to several online publications and blogs, including the Huffington Post, and in 2009 was named one of Washington's Tech Titans by Washingtonian magazine.  You can follow her on twitter at http://twittter.com/Leslie_Harris

Sheila Krumholz has been the Executive Director of the Center of Responsive Politics since 2007. She has been at the Center since 1989 (with a few years off) working her way up through the research ranks, overseeing the internal data compilation and analyses found on CRP’s site, OpenSecrets.org, as well as customized research for CRP’s clients. Under her leadership, CRP has increased its reputation as a reliable source for accurate, nonpartisan research and the premier resource on political finance, lobbying, revolving door and other influence data at the federal level. Sheila also a heads an organization where three of their four senior staff members – including the directors of IT and research – are women, representing a combined 40 years of work at the Center. You can follow her on twitter at http://www.twitter.com/skrmhlz.

Jen Palkha spent 15 years in technology media before deciding to focus on transparency at the municipal level with the founding of her new organization – Code for America – that works with city governments to identify web apps that drive transparency, efficiency and participation, and that are reusable by other cities. Code for America recruits teams of fellows from the web industry to build these apps through a structured program of public service. Jennifer is currently working with the 11 cities who applied for their first development cycle to decide which three to five projects will be built starting in January 2011. You can follow her on twitter at http://www.twitter.com/pahlkadot.

Melanie Sloan, a former federal prosecutor and Hill staffer, started Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics (CREW) in Washington in 2003. CREW has used litigation as a tactic to force our government to be more transparent. Melanie and CREW were instrumental in revealing that millions of emails disappeared from Bush White House servers. It is also thanks to CREW’s lawsuits against both the Bush and Obama administrations that the Obama White House now makes White House visitor records available online. You can follow CREW's work on twitter at http://www.twitter.com/CREWCREW

And my colleagues would berate me for not including my own story. I am co-founder and executive director of the Sunlight Foundation, a non-partisan, non-profit organization dedicated to using the power of the Internet to catalyze greater government openness and transparency. I am the founder of two other prominent Washington-based organizations in the field of money and politics – the Center for Responsive Politics and Public Campaign – and an expert on transparency and the influence of money in politics. You can follow me on twitter at http://www.twitter.com/ellnmllr

It’s been an enormous pleasure to work with  Ryan, Danielle, Sheila, Leslie, Jen and Melanie for many years.  We all say “thank you, Ada” for paving the way.

This morning a number of organizations -- POGO, OMB Watch, CREW, National Security Archive, the Center for Democracy and Technology  and the Open The Government coalition-- and Sunlight sent a letter to Vivek Kundra, Federal CIO, about improvements needed to the release of High Value Datasets on Data.gov. Here are the core recommendations included. Please tell us what you think in the comments below.

As advocates for government openness, we support the Administration’s efforts to provide the public with access to information through Data.gov. We are eager to work with you to ensure the success of Data.gov and, in that spirit, write to raise our concerns with the datasets submitted by agencies to fulfill their requirement under the Open Government Directive to post three high value datasets by January 22, and to offer constructive suggestions for improving their usefulness.

As an overall recommendation, we urge you to add public representatives to the Open Government Initiative interagency working committee and ask the committee to address the problems and recommendations identified below.

Release Format and Usability by the Public

We understand one of the primary purposes of Data.gov is to enable the technology community and transparency advocates to most effectively use the data to make a direct impact on the daily lives of the American people. The format of the data plays a key role in its usability; many within the community of advocates who re-use and repackage government data would prefer data in CSV format, rather than the XML format in which many of the posted databases are provided. Accordingly, we recommend that you strike an appropriate balance between formats (such as XML) that serve the coding community and web-based presentations by agencies that can be used and understood by the general public.

In addition, some of the currently posted files are quite large, ranging upward to several hundred megabytes. Their large size undermines their usefulness for most people or organizations. The large number of currently posted datasets also makes it difficult to find a particular database of interest. We therefore recommend that if a Data.gov dataset is available from an agency through a web-based interface, Data.gov link to that interface on the dataset's Data.gov landing page. For a consumer looking for information on a car seat, for example, it would be far easier to search the Department of Transportation's online database rather than scrolling through screen after screen of raw data in XML format. Additionally, as agencies continue to post datasets to Data.gov, efforts should be made to identify those of greatest public interest that lack such interfaces and develop web interfaces that allow the data to be explored online.

Further, while we agree there is value in aggregating government data in a single site, it is questionable how much the collocation of the currently posted information on Data.gov actually benefits the public. The site is not searchable by topic and does not provide any way to bring together data from different sources on similar topics.

As an enhancement to the organization of the site, we recommend that you use tagging or metadata to enable the public to bring together information on a topic. The thesaurus that USA.gov uses provides a useful example of the needed vocabulary.

Value of Data

The release of the datasets also has prompted discussions about the value and the quality of the released data, and the additional value provided by access to existing data in a new format. We believe repackaging old information is of marginal value, yet that is what many agencies have done with their recent postings on Data.gov. According to the Sunlight Foundation, of 58 datasets posted by major agencies, only 16 were previously unavailable in some format online. This leaves the impression that agencies posted easily available data, the proverbial low-hanging fruit, rather than seriously considering which of their datasets truly are of high value. While these initial postings can be considered a test run, more attention needs to be directed toward ensuring the overall quality and usefulness of the data.

In addition, sustained attention should be paid to the possibility of making some of the datasets available as feeds that are constantly up to date, rather than as static datasets that are pulled down and then reposted on an occasional basis. We recommend that agencies be required to explain why the data is high value by having them designate which of the “high value criteria” the data meets: information that can be used to increase agency accountability and responsiveness; improve public knowledge of the agency and its operations; further the core mission of the agency; create economic opportunity; or respond to need and demand as identified through public consultation. Similarly, we recommend requiring agencies to indicate whether a high value dataset was previously unavailable, available only with a FOIA request, available only for purchase, or available, but in a less user-friendly format. Going forward, this will make it much easier to track how agencies are complying with the other requirements of the Open Government Directive. While we appreciate the value of data that furthers the mission of an agency, we believe it is equally important to make available to the public data that holds an agency accountable for its policy and spending decisions. We hope to see more datasets of this type available in the near future.

Quality

As is to be expected in efforts of this type, there were a number of glitches--datasets that could not be downloaded or, once downloaded, could not be opened (the Central Contractor Registration FOIA extract from the General Services Administration seems to have caused several users problems). Additionally, some datasets were incomplete (the Hazard Grant Mitigation Program data released by FEMA is missing 23 years of data between 1966 and 1989). Even more troubling, some did not have header rows, and for those that did, their Data.gov pages did not always link to code sheets explaining what those header rows meant. Without this information, the data cannot be used.

We therefore urge the implementation of a responsive feedback mechanism that allows the public to alert an agency that a specific dataset is not working, lacks information, or is missing explanatory material and provides a response to the concerns within a specified time. One way to address this may be to include an agency contact with the ability to resolve any database problems or provide information about the database. The interagency working group could sample the quality of these agency-specific dialogues to ensure that they are having an impact and to develop recommendations on best practices to improve the responsiveness. Additionally, we strongly recommend that all datasets on Data.gov be directly associated with their code sheets.

Finally, we are concerned with the current lack of public notice when data is removed from the site. We respectfully urge you to note all raw tools and data that are removed from Data.gov, and to provide an explanation for their removal.

Many of the concerns outlined above apply across all or many of the agencies’ datasets. Accordingly, we think that standards for handling these types of problems can easily be addressed through the interagency working group and then disseminated amongst the agencies.

Here are some of the more interesting media mentions of Sunlight and our friends and allies over the past week:

National Journal's Eliza Newlin Carney wrote about how the health care industry is unleashing big money as the health care debate in Congress intensifies. She notes the blog post from Paul Blumenthal, Sunlight's senior writer, about how five of Sen. Max Baucus' (Mont.) former staff members now work for a total of 27 different organizations that either represent the health care or insurance industries, or have a vested interest in the debate. She also quotes Paul, "We thought it was important to show the public that the senators aren't crafting the policy by themselves. They have all these other connections, through relationships, that have a huge stake in this legislation." Trudy Lieberman with the Columbia Journalism Review also highlighted and linked to Paul's post and the graphic he and Kerry Mitchell, Sunlight's creative director, produced. The "study shows exactly what advocates of real and substantive health reform are up against," Lieberman wrote, adding that Sunlight provides clarity on just who has the senator’s ear.

Speaking of Kerry's graphic art skills, The New York Times' "First Look" blog includes one of his illustrations in a post highlighting great visualizations created by designers using the Times APIs that "both beautify and clarify information." Kerry's graphic illustrates the Times' usage of the word "transparency" since 1990.

David Talbot at MIT's Technology Review, in an article how volunteers are using the Web to help make the U.S. government more accountable, highlighted Transparency Corps. Talbot quoted Clay Johnson, director of Sunlight Labs, "Government puts out a ton of data that is really interesting about what it does, but people can't understand it." Transparency Corps launch roughly coincided with the launch earlier this month of the White House's IT Dashboard, the administration's effort to chart the progress of information-technology projects in various federal agencies. The article quotes Andrew Rasiej, Sunlight's senior technology advisor and co-founder of Personal Democracy Forum, saying the dashboard may be just the tip of the iceberg heralding a new age of transparency regarding federal spending. "Once people get used to this type of information being so readily accessible, they will demand to see (it) for all other federal spending too, and then the genie will be completely out of the bottle."

Dan Eggen at The Washington Post wrote how the debate about health-care reform has been a boon to the political fortunes of the 52 members of the Blue Dog Coalition, who have become key brokers in shaping legislation in the House. Eggan used Party Time data to show show U.S. Rep. Mike Ross (Ark.), a leader of the Blue Dogs, has had a steady schedule of fundraising events sponsored by the health industry or lobbying firms that represent health-care companies. Eggen used data from the Center for Responsive Politics that showed Ross had received nearly $1 million in contributions from the health-care sector and insurance industry during his five terms in Congress. On the topic of Party Time, be sure not to miss National Journal's interview with Party Time's director Nancy Watzman.

The (Riverside, Calif.) Press-Enterprise quotes data from Taxpayers for Common Sense that shows the $636 billion military spending bill passed Thursday by the House contains 1,100 earmarks totaling roughly $2.75 billion. Rep. Jerry Lewis (Calif.) inserted 19 earmarks worth more than $70 million for defense firms with Inland Southern California branches and other area institutions, according to Taxpayers.

Joe Davidson, "Federal Diary" columnist for The Washington Post, wrote about how 10 years of work paid off Wednesday when the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs advanced S. 372, the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2009, meant to further protect federal whistleblowers. Because of important differences between the House and the Senate on the bill, there was real concern that the legislation would flounder. But "shuttle diplomacy" conducted by the Obama White House "left those involved feeling as if they gained more than they gave up," Davidson wrote. He quoted Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, "There were genuine concerns that people worked through. It's the way you want government to work."

PC World reports on a call from the Center for Democracy and Technology to the Obama administration to answer several questions about the privacy implications of a new version of a computer intrusion detection system that can reportedly read email. On Tuesday, CDT released a report (PDF) calling on the administration to provide information about the legal authority for the so-called Einstein intrusion detection system currently being employed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Resource Shelf, a daily newsletter with resources of interest to information professionals, educators and journalists, highlighted OpenCongress' redesign. "If you or those you work with have any interest in the workings of the U.S. Congress and related matters, OpenCongress is one impressive (and free) resource," the post says. "We strongly recommend taking a look at it."

Here are a few of the more interesting media mentions of Sunlight and our friends and allies from the week:

Jeff Jacoby, columnist for The Boston Globe, mentioned ReadTheBill.org in a piece he wrote calling on congressional lawmakers read legislation before they vote on it. Glenn Reynolds, at his Instapundit blog, linked to Jacoby's column. Andrew Sullivan's blog, The Daily Dish, followed by linking to Reynolds.

In Washington Monthly's July/August edition, Charles Homans wrote about the Obama administration's "experiments with data-driven democracy." The article centers on the work of Vivek Kundra, the White House's chief information officer, and mentions both the District of Columbia's Apps for Democracy contest and Sunlight's Apps for America contest. Homans quotes Clay Johnson, Sunlight Labs' director, saying Kundra has his work cut out for him. "I have nothing but respect for what he’s trying to do. But it’s a hard job, and it’s going to take some time for this to actually happen right. I mean years." While discussing Kundra's launch of Data.gov, Homans again quotes Clay, "The top data source is on the world’s copper smelters, which isn’t going to tell us very much about what’s going on inside of our government."

As Ellen Miller, Sunlight's director, wrote earlier this week, "When it comes to following the money that’s flowing to power on Capitol Hill, no one does it better than the Center for Responsive Politics." For instance, MAPLight.org used CRP data to show how money watered down the energy bill, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (HR 2454). With Congress debating health care reform, Forbes used CRP data to show how America's Health Insurance Plans, the political advocacy and trade group for the health insurance industry, has spent nearly $10 million on lobbying Congress in the past two years. Robert J. S. Ross, writing at The Huffington Post, quotes CRP about how the insurance industry has contributed $568 million to political campaigns since 1998. CNN's Jonathan Mann used CRP data in noting how doctors have spent roughly two-thirds of a billion dollars lobbying lawmakers in the last 10 years.

Sunlight's launch of the National Data Catalog generated a number of good media mentions. Federal News Radio's Dorothy Ramienski interviewed Clay about the launch, who said the impetus for the new site is that Data.gov can't go as far as some would like because of laws that are already in place, such as the Paperwork Reduction Act. "For instance, right now Data.gov only has information around the executive branch of government. It doesn't have any information around the judicial or the legislative branch of government and we don't have any indication as to whether or not it can." Marshall Kirkpatrick at ReadWriteWeb asked, "Can Sunlight build a one-stop-shopping destination for public data, and will people make use of that? Time will tell, but it sounds like a very important project." And Next.gov's Aliya Sternstein referred to the catalog as "a public-service Web site that pulls and repackages federal data - fulfilling the aim of the White House's 'democratizing data' campaign."

National Public Radio's Dina Temple-Raston, in a piece that aired on the network's "Morning Edition," reported how analysts at the FBI and CIA are turning to software to help find patterns among terrorists — hoping to spot clues in everything from phone calls to credit card and ATM usage. She interviewed Jim Dempsey, the director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, "There had been, over the past seven years, this sense that if you collect more and more data and put it into a powerful enough computer, shake it and bake it the right way you'll come up with the unknowns" — terrorists who aren't yet on law enforcement's radar screens, Jim said. "I think, and other people who are more technically adept than I think, that's really a fool's errand."

John Moore at Federal Computer Week wrote how Web 3.0 could help make President Obama’s dream of government transparency a reality, but he’ll need a second term to see it happen. "The Web’s traditional function is to simply present content, such as a government report posted online. The Semantic Web goes a step further by seeking to illuminate the content’s meaning," Moore wrote. While discussing the challenges, Moore lists the time and effort required to tag and describe the government’s vast data holdings. He quotes Clay expressing concern that the government might become preoccupied with formatting data rather than releasing it. “I would hate to see them get bogged down in trying to make their data Semantic Web compatible before it even sees the light of day,” Clay said. Gary Bass, director of OMB Watch, said his group would like to look at government contractors to see if they comply with Occupational Health and Safety Administration, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and other agency directives. But the group would need to know that a company listed in one database is the same entity listed in others. “Semantic technology, if done properly, should be able to tell us that,” Gary said.

Veteran reporter J. Scott Orr, writing at Parade magazine, reports on how federal contracts often waste taxpayer money for lack of proper oversight. He cites an investigation (PDF) by the Government Accountability Office that found required performance assessments were conducted for less than one-third of the 23,000 contracts it surveyed. Orr quotes Scott Amey, general counsel to the Project on Government Oversight, saying the feds would save billions of dollars if they would more efficiently collect and share performance data. “Considering Uncle Sam spent over $530 billion last year,” Amey says, “a higher priority must be placed on choosing contractors that are a wise investment.”

U.S. Rep. Bill Cassidy (La.) wrote a column in The Huffington Post calling for more earmark disclosure in Congress. He wrote how he and Rep. Jackie Speier (Calif.) worked with Taxpayers for Common Sense and Sunlight to introduce House Resolution 440, which would strengthen transparency and accountability in the earmarking process.

Think Progress' Matt Corley wrote about a memo GOP message guru Frank Luntz wrote defining the Republican rhetoric on health care reform. Corley quotes from and links to Sunlight senior writer Paul Blumenthal's blog post where he used Capitol Words to show how congressional Republicans are following Luntz's advice. At his Liberaland blog, Alan Colmes, the liberal commentator, syndicated radio talk show host and Fox News Channel political contributor, also linked to Paul's post and republished the infographic that used Capitol Words data to show the impact of the memo.

Here are a few of the more interesting media mentions of Sunlight and our friends and allies from the week:

CNN interviewed Ellen Miller, Sunlight’s executive director, in an article on lobbyists and the need for disclosure of their interactions with congressional lawmakers and other federal officials.

Katharine Q. Seelye at The New York Times reported on the fact that, five months into his administration, President Obama has signed two dozen bills, but he has almost never waited the five days, as he promised during his election campaign. She noted how open government and other watchdog groups have criticized the president for not living up to his pledge. Seelye quotes Ellen as saying it’s less important for the president to wait before signing a bill than it is for the Congress to wait 72 hours before voting on it. “There isn’t anybody in this town who doesn’t know that commenting after a bill has been passed is meaningless." The article also has an accompanying video.

Politico's Victoria McGrane reported on how the Senate is considering putting all their office expenses — including staff salaries — online, as well as requiring campaign fundraising reports to be published on the Web. The mere fact that the Senate leadership has conducted a whip count is an encouraging sign for the reforms' passage, McGrane writes. And she quotes Lisa Rosenberg, Sunlight’s , “They wouldn’t be talking about bringing it up for a vote if it wasn’t pretty solid."

The Washington Examiner reports on Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington calling on the Obama administration to release the names of health care executives who have visited the White House. “If you are going to criticize other people for secrecy, you better have an open door,” said Melanie Sloan, CREW’s executive director. “They talk about transparency more than they exhibit it.”

Brian Wingfield at Forbes.com wrote about the health care reform debate and linked to Sunlight’s senior writer Paul Blumenthal's blog post about former senators Tom Daschle and Bob Dole releasing a health care plan while being health care lobbyists.

Lisa Wangsness with The Boston Globe reported on bloggers from the medical, technology, and patient advocacy worlds organizing to win the right of patients to gain access to their computerized health records from their doctors in an electronic format. She quotes the Center for Democracy & Technology’s Deven McGraw noting that federal law already entitles patients to easy, inexpensive access to their health records in whatever format they exist. Too often, she said, patients, doctors, and hospitals are not aware of the law. She added that Congress included $19 billion in the stimulus package for electronic medical records systems. Patients and their doctors need to have a clearer understanding of that right, she said.

The New York Times picked up Anne C. Mulkern’s Greenwire piece on how money has helped to grease the skids of the Cap and Trade Energy Bill on Capitol Hill. The report used data from the Center for Responsive Politics to show how industry with a stake in the legislation has attempted to influence the vote in their favor.

Sunlight’s concern over how fast the energy bill Congress is moving the generated a number of editorials in support of our position. The (St. Paul, Minn.) Pioneer Press editorialized about the energy bill, "Has anybody read those 1,200 pages?” The editorial says "it is a big deal," and the "virtues of transparency don't apply only to the work of one's opponents. If the price of broader public understanding of major legislation is a slower process, good." And the editorial ended with, "To our friends at the Sunlight Foundation, we say: Keep the pressure on." The Chicago Tribune also editorialized about Cap and Trade. "Remember that gargantuan climate change bill we told you about last week? It's gotten bigger. Over the weekend, the bill grew from 946 pages to 1,201 pages, according to the Sunlight Foundation. It's still changing, with important amendments in flux. And The (Riverside, Calif.) Press-Enterprise wrote a Cap and Trade editorial as well that used many of Sunlight's talking points.

ReadWriteWeb's Marshal Kirkpatrick wrote about the U.S. Office of Management and Budget issuing new reporting guidelines this week for recipients of the $787 billion Recovery Act. "The normally polite geek watchdog organization the Sunlight Foundation has come out swinging," Kirkpatrick wrote, referencing Ellen's blog post from yesterday where she called it a "significant failure" on the part of the administration by not living up to its promise for full and complete disclosure. Kirkpatrick also mentions how the Senate is now offering mashup-friendly XML (extensible markup language) feeds for Senate voting history. He lifted quotes from Sunlight's policy director John Wonderlich from a Politico article from April on the arguments against the chamber offering the voting history in XML. "The secretary of the Senate has cited a general standing policy that they're not supposed to present votes in a comparative format, that senators have the right to present their votes however they want to."

Speaking of the OMB’s new reporting guidelines, NextGov.com’s Aliya Sternstein noted other problems. The latest guidance does not include previous instructions from an earlier incarnation directing agencies to configure news feeds that would allow citizens to receive automatic updates. She interviewed Craig Jennings from OMB Watch, who said for standardization purposes, "it does make sense that there is some restriction to the raw data . . . to make sure [that, for example,] 'assn' equals association, 'Boeing Inc.' is the same as Boeing Incorporation."

Thanks.

Here are a few of the more interesting media mentions of Sunlight and our friends and grantees from this past week:

Federal law prohibits lobbyists and those that hire them from giving gifts or campaign contributions to congressional lawmakers. No such law exists prohibiting them from spending unlimited amounts to honor lawmakers or contributing to non-profits connected to them. Quite a limitation on the distinction, if you ask me. However, Congress passed ethics rules in 2007 requiring for the first time that lobbyists must report all such payments. On Monday, USA Today's Fredreka Shouten and Paul Overberg reported on the paper's comprehensive analysis of lobbying reports that found 2,759 payments, totaling $35.8 million, were made in 2008. They quote Ellen Miller, Sunlight’s executive director, "It's another example of the many pockets of a politician's coat." The spending amounts to an "end-run" around campaign-finance laws "that are designed to limit the appearance of undue influence." National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" interviewed Clay Johnson, Sunlight Labs’s director, about U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley's (Iowa) use of Twitter to criticize President Obama's call for action on health care. Grassley’s message: "Pres Obama you got nerve while u sightseeing in Paris to tell us 'time to deliver' on health care. We still on skedul/even workinWKEND." Clay said, "He may not be the most prolific writer in 140 characters or less, but there's something really authentic about it."

NPR Interview

Federal News Radio interviewed Daniel Schuman about how the U.S. Supreme Court's nine-year old Web site is hard to navigate, difficult to use and in need of a significant upgrade. Daniel had blogged about the SCOTUS site last week. You can listen to the interview here.

Federal News Radio interview

Journalists used Center for Responsive Politics data to show how two important congressional battles are shaping up. With the debate over health reform intensifing, The New York Times’ Robert Pear looked at the political spending of doctors. Since the 2000 election cycle, their political action committee has contributed $9.8 million to congressional candidates with Republicans got more than Democrats in the four election cycles before 2008, when 56 percent went to Democrats. Congress is also considering legislation that would mandate the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to regulate and approve the use of tobacco. Halimah Abdullah with McClatchy Newspapers reports that CRP data shows that among the 17 senators who voted against tasking the FDA with the tobacco regulatory role are top recipients of campaign contributions from the industry.

The Washington Post’s Paul Kane and Carol D. Leonnig researched the House lawmakers’ annual financial disclosure reports released Wednesday. They found lawmakers had significant investments in the financial institutions that took billions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts at the end of last year, raising conflict-of-interest questions. They quote Melanie Sloan, director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, as being critical of congressional lawmakers investing directly in companies they oversee. "You wonder if they're voting on things because it's good for the country or because it would increase their personal wealth," Melanie said.

Bara Viada at National Journal's "Under the Influence" blog reported on and links to Party Time's post about how the National Republican Campaign Committee inadvertently included a fundraising event for a Democratic lawmaker, U.S. Rep. Gary Peters (Mich.), on a list of fundraising events the party committee sent out earlier this week. Roll Call's (subscription required) Emily Heil and Elizabeth Brotherton, writing at their "Heard on the Hill" column, also report on Party Time's catch, as did Politico’s Glenn Thrush.

ProPublica’s Christina Jewett reported on the Project for Government Oversight’s call on the FDA’s inspector general to investigate the agency in light of its failure to stop contaminated syringes from reaching the market. An earlier report said the FDA’s inaction allowed 74,000 contaminated syringes to be shipped. “Authorities connected four deaths and 162 illnesses to the syringes,” Jewett wrote.

At his Joho the Blog, David Weinberger, live blogged a talk Clay participated in yesterday at the New Media Academic Summit held by public relations firm Edelman at Georgetown University. When asked how government and others can be encouraged to produce data in open formats Clay responded, "I’m more focused on just getting the data out. I don’t care about the format. We should tell them just to do it in plain text, if that’ll get it out faster. Once the government starts pumping it out we can have the debate about which standards."

InformationWeek’s Thomas Claburn reports on a court case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit over the issue of whether e-mail messages deserve the same privacy protection as telephone calls. He notes that Electronic Frontier Foundation, the ACLU of Ohio, and the Center for Democracy and Technology filed an amicus brief in the case, Warshak v. USA, in support of added privacy protections.

T. J. Kelleher, writing at science magazine Seed’s "Week in Review" editorial, looked at Data.gov, the federal government’s site that promises to provide free access to data generated across all of its agencies. Kelleher asked, “Where’s the sunshine?” Kelleher mentions Sunlight Labs' Apps for America 2 contest, which is encouraging developers to build tools that will enable the common citizen to engage with the information Data.gov will be making available.

Federal Computer Week’s Ben Bain reported on Miriam Nisbet’s appointment to be the first director of a new office at the National Archives and Records Administration that will provide policy guidance to agencies for the handling of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and mediate disagreements about agency decisions not to grant requests. Some have referred to the new position as an “ombudsman” for FOIA, a development that open government advocates have welcomed wholeheartedly. Bain quotes Patrice McDermott, OpenTheGovernment.org’s director, as saying Nisbet has a deep knowledge of the issues and has strong ties to the open-government community. Patrice worked directly with Nisbet for four years at the American Library Association, Bain reports.

Tim Catts at AOL’s Daily Finance site reported that the ten banks cleared by the feds to buy back $68 billion in preferred stock investments they sold under the Treasury Department's rescue program aren't quite in the clear yet. They still have to settle on a price to repurchase hundreds of millions of warrants held by the government. Catts suggests his readers turn to SubsidyScope for a quick rundown of what goes into valuing a warrant.

In case you didn't see it, Jake Brewer, Sunlight’s engagement director, briefly profiles RaceTracker on The Huffington Post, the "non-partisan, fully-referenced, open-source and crowd-sourced wiki project that lists every candidate running in every U.S. Senate, House and governor's race" that soft launched yesterday.

Here are a few of the more interesting media mentions of Sunlight and our friends and grantees from this week:

Saturday evening, Ellen Miller, Sunlight’s executive director, appeared on CNN talking about Recovery.gov. She made the point that Recovery.gov needs to be updated in real time so people can keep government accountable as it happens, instead of after the fact. Below is the video of the segment:

The New York Times published an editorial calling for Congress to provide Congressional Research Service reports online for all Americans to access free. The Times ran the editorial a week after Ellen met with an editorial writer at the paper. Last week, The Times published an article about the campaign being waged by Open CRS, a project of the Center for Democracy and Technology, OpenTheGovernment.org and Sunlight to get Congress to agree to release all CRS reports to the public.

Cyrus Sanati wrote a post on The Time’s “DealBook” blog that highlighted and linked to SubsidyScope’s county-by-county analysis of how the government is distributing Troubled Asset Relief Program funds throughout the country. The Atlantic’s Chris Good, on their “Politics” blog, also wrote about and linked to SubsidyScope’s map. The San Francisco Bay Guardian’s “Politics” blog wrote about Sunlight grantee MAPLight.org launching their Los Angeles site,  where they reveal campaign contributions to Los Angeles City politicians. MAPLight.org’s new site shows how much interest groups like real estate developers, teachers unions and others contribute to city officials and to candidates running for city office. The site is the first of its kind for any U.S. city. As always, journalists used Center for Responsive Politics’ data to uncover how Washington works. The Wall Street Journal reports that Lockheed Martin, the country’s largest defense contractor, doubled the amount of money spent on lobbying in first quarter of 2009 as it did during the previous three months ($6.41 million during the first quarter, up 97% from the prior quarter's $3.26 million), all in an effort to prevent defense spending cuts. The “Environment Blog” at the U.K.’s guardian.co.uk highlight CRP in a post about how to follow the fossil fuel money on Capitol Hill. The New York Times editorialized that “It is time to follow the money — all of it,” in light of CRP’s report that U.S. Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania and two subcommittee colleagues, Peter Visclosky of Indiana and James Moran of Virginia, received more than $4 million in campaign contributions from PMA Group clients. In its June issue, Harper’s Magazine published an article by Nancy Watzman, director of Sunlight’s Party Time project. Nancy breaks down, bit-by-bit, a congressional lawmaker’s fundraising event invitation, revealing to those of us not accustom to writing politicians $2,500 checks what we’re missing. Speaking of Party Time, the Politico’s Chris Frates used data from the project to identify some of the bars and restaurants within easy walking distance of the U.S. Capitol where congressional lawmakers meet with lobbyists and other to raise campaign cash. Jose Vargas at The Washington Post compiled the second of his monthly report cards where he has a group of five online political observers grade WhiteHouse.gov. Last month’s report card produced an average grade of a C+. In this second round the group gave the administration an average of a solid B, with the individual graders giving a range from C to A-. Ellen and Andrew Rasiej, Sunlight’s senior technology advisor, participate as graders, and both gave WhiteHouse.gov a B-. If they were to grade the site on the basis of transparency alone, they would have given the site a C-, Vargas reported. Thanks! See you next Friday.

Today, May 8th, marks the 125th birthday of Harry S Truman, our 33rd president. He once said, "Secrecy and a free, democratic government don't mix." Amen, Mr. President.

Here are a few of the more interesting media mentions of Sunlight and our friends and grantees from this week:

Monday morning, Tom Lee, a technology director at Sunlight, appeared on C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal” taking questions about Recovery.gov, the Web site set up to track spending under the federal government’s economic stimulus program. Tom is working on SubsidyScope, a project of The Pew Charitable Trusts, that looks at the role of federal subsidies in the economy. Below is the video of the segment:

Speaking of Recovery.gov, Matt Kelley with USA Today reported that the Web site won't have details on contracts and grants until October and may not be complete until next spring — halfway through the program. Kelley quotes Greg Elin, Sunlight’s chief evangelist, saying people accustomed to getting easily searchable information quickly could be frustrated. "If we have to wait until October to get the information or to the end of the year to get a powerful recovery.gov site, the Obama administration will have missed an important opportunity."

Katrina Vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation, in an op-ed titled "Ways to Protect Our Democracy," highlights the work of Sunlight and Sunlight Labs, and mentions the Apps for America contest. Vanden Heuvel quotes Gabriela Schneider, "This is the next generation of civic engagement…We see it as a way to revitalize democracy. The transparency work is a catalyst for the greater democracy reform movement."

The U.S. Senate announced this week that it was going to start publishing roll call votes in XML, an online format that’s easily reusable by other programs. XML allows the data to be manipulated and organized in such a way that public interest groups can get a much more thorough picture of Senate voting patterns. In writing about the move, the Politico’s  Victoria McGrane quoted John Wonderlich, Sunlight's policy director, as saying the Senate’s decision was “spectacular.” The Examiner newspapers editorialized that the move signals the Senate had finally joined the 21st Century. As encouraging and important as this step by the Senate is, I’d hold off on that designation until senators start disclosing campaign finance data online and in a timely manner.

The New York Times’ Stephanie Strom highlighted the campaign to get Congress to release to the public Congressional Research Service reports, highlighting the efforts of Open CRS, Center for Democracy and Technology, OpentheGovernment.org and Sunlight.

Jeanne Cummings at the Politico wrote about “lobbyist contact” disclosures posted on government department and agency Web sites. She made note of a review conducted by Paul Blumenthal, Sunlight’s senior writer, that found only 14 of a possible 29 departments and agencies have created Web pages to disclose lobbyist inquiries. On March 20, President Obama issued a memo to all agencies involved with the distribution of funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act requiring them to disclose all communications between lobbyists and agency officials. John Fritze with USA Today wrote that Obama’s effort to make lobbying more transparent has shed little light on the behind-the-scenes, special-interests lobbying thus far. He quotes Melanie Sloan, director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, "We're looking to have more disclosure, not less. If this was supposed to give us more disclosure, why is it that you're not seeing lobbyist communications?"

Mother Jones' Jonathan Stein profiled Lisa Rosenberg, Sunlight’s government affairs consultant, terming her "K Street's worst nightmare" and "the lobbyist lobbyists hate." He wrote that Lisa is "not your average influence peddler," but does the "unthinkable" by lobbying for more oversight and regulation of lobbying. Stein quotes Lisa, "I have no friends...My lobbyist colleagues are cringing at the things that I do."

Joshua Zumbrun at Forbes.com wrote about six ways Uncle Sam can help rescue newspapers. One of his proposals is for the government to help ease newspapers into nonprofit status, citing the Center for Responsive Politics and the Center for Public Integrity as examples of nonprofit organizations that are already making an impact.

Thanks, and see you next Friday!

Once again, Sen. Joe Lieberman (Conn.) has introduced a resolution in the Senate to put non-confidential Congressional Research Service (CRS) reports online. Heather West at the Center for Democracy & Technology’s “PolicyBeta” blog  writes that a solid bi-partisan group of senators have joined Lieberman as co-sponsors. S. Res. 118 is a Senate resolution, which means the Senate Rules Committee and an overall Senate vote are all that’s needed to open the reports to the public -- who paid for them to be produced in the first place.

CRS is a $100 million funded “think tank” housed in the Library of Congress that researches and writes reports for Congressional lawmakers and their staff on current topics. They include serious and smart analysis, and the reports are well worth reading if you are interested in the hot issues of the day. These reports exist on an internal server on the Hill, but the public is denied access to them. The only way you can get them in by calling a lawmaker’s office and requesting a copy. (Of course, how do you know to ask about a report if its existence isn’t publicly listed someplace…A classic Washington Catch-22.)

Open CRS, a CDT project and Sunlight grantee, provides citizens access to CRS Reports already in the public domain and encourages Congress to provide public access to all CRS Reports. OpenCRS gets their copies from various people who choose to ‘liberate’ them. WikiLeaks, a Web site that publishes anonymous submissions and leaks of sensitive governmental, corporate, or religious documents, while attempting to preserve the anonymity and untraceability of its contributors, has released nearly a billion dollars worth of CRS reports, as well. There is one commercial service that manages someway, somehow to get all of them all. This service charges an arm and a leg.

Sunlight shares CDT’s demand that Congress open up all CRS reports to the public. This is an easy transparency reform. Kudos to Sen. Lieberman and his co-sponsors on continuing to press this important and common sense reform.

Yesterday, Sen. Joe Lieberman introduced a resolution (S. Res. 118), with a bipartisan cast of cosponsors, to allow for the public release of Congressional Research Service (CRS) reports. CRS reports are some of the best research documents in the nation and are currently used by lawmakers and their staff to inform their decisions and help in crafting legislation. Currently, CRS reports are not supposed to be released to the public, however, some web sites collect them from lawmaker offices distributing them anonymously. Many of these sites are pay sites, save for Open CRS, which is operated by the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT).

CDT lauds the new Lieberman resolution in a blog post:

The public can also purchase copies of the reports from CRS report resellers, but obtaining copies of all the reports that are relevant would cost a great deal of money for reports that are entirely taxpayer funded in the first place.

Senate Resolution 118 would change that by allowing lawmakers to provide access to CRS services to the public on official website. Rather than creating a new tool for public access, the resolution would let Members and Committees share reports with the public using the same online services that are available on Congress’ internal CRS website.

Critically, the new resolution also requires that an index of CRS issue briefs and reports to be made public. Currently, Open CRS receives updates on reports as they are published from an anonymous lawmaker, but a public index of reports would simplify this process. It would be simple to provide this index, and to let the public know what their lawmakers are reading- and for them to read it too. It is high time for an officially sanctioned, free way to distribute the reports to the people.

This is a resolution that deserves strong support. The free release of CRS reports has always been a top priority of The Open House Project.