Senate

 

Oppose Government Waste and Support Government Accountability in a Single Bill

As of midnight last night, candidates for federal office were to have filed their campaign finance disclosure reports with the Federal Election Commission. These reports contain crucial information that lets voters know which special interests, big-money lobbyists or out-of-state donors may be funding a candidate’s campaign. The reports are supposed to be public, but if you try to find Senate candidates’ reports today, you will be out of luck. Why? Because the Senate has exempted itself from filing directly with the FEC, instead using the Secretary of the Senate as an intermediary. And instead of filing their reports electronically, like House candidates and presidential candidates have been doing for years, Senators and Senate candidates mail or hand-deliver paper printouts of their electronically generated reports.

After receiving the reports, the Secretary of the Senate must scan, page by painstaking page, thousands of pages of campaign finance reports before transmitting them to the FEC. It may be days or weeks before the FEC receives the reports—longer for the ones that are mailed rather than hand delivered, as the mailed reports don’t even arrive at the Secretary of the Senate’s office until they have been processed off site.

But wait, there’s more. After it receives the scanned documents, the FEC must then spend about $450,000 in taxpayer dollars and untold hours having the records typed in, line-by-line, to the FEC’s databases. It will take at least three weeks before the information is publicly available—longer in the middle of a busy election season. The process isn’t just inefficient. It denies citizens timely access to information that can help shape and inform their opinions about their candidates and elected officials.

Senator Tester and Cochran have repeatedly introduced legislation to streamline the process and make electronic filing mandatory. This Congress, a bipartisan group of 30 senators have cosponsored S. 375, the Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act, with many others voicing support for the measure.

Despite its overwhelming support, the bill has not become law because some in the Senate have chosen to make it a political pawn. That is why we urge every Senator who supports transparency and government efficiency, as well as every one who opposes government waste, to cosponsor the bill. Overwhelming, demonstrated support may be the best chance this common sense piece of legislation to pass.

Obama Pushes Senate E-Filing in Proposed Budget

President Obama's 2014 budget includes a Sunlight priority that won't erase the deficit, but will streamline the way that important campaign finance information becomes public. Last year, we noted that Obama had included a provision in his FY13 budget proposal that would require Senate Campaign Committees to file their campaign finance reports electronically and it appears that he's pushing the idea again this year.

Specific language can be found in a document outlining spending for "Other Independent Agencies." It is very similar to the provisions included in the FY13 request and reads:

The Budget proposes that Senate Campaign Committees be required to file campaign finance reports electronically with the Federal Election Commission, which is consistent with the reporting requirements for all other Federal political committees. This measure will save at least $430,000 annually by reducing costs for manual data entry and will also promote transparency by expediting the process by which the reports are made available to the public.

 

The Senate has been hesitant to take this step into the 21st century, although the idea has a champion in Senator Jon Tester who introduced the Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act in the 112th Congress and again earlier this year.

Requiring the Senate to file their campaign finance reports electronically with the FEC is a simple and cost effective way to increase transparency and efficiency. Hopefully this provision will make its way into whatever budget plan successfully passes Congress.

Research Tool Kit: Gun Laws, Lobbying and Influence in the United States

With the U.S. Senate expected to take up gun legislation next week and recent passing of gun laws in Connecticut, Colorado and Maryland, we put together a tool kit on the issues around gun rights and gun control. For more information, you can follow the money, influence and news on the issue of gun control and gun rights in the U.S. at our resource page.

Keep reading for information about state legislation, swing votes in the Senate, political spending by gun rights and gun control groups, details on how they lobby Congress and where they are airing TV issue ads.

Read more

Publish all agency reports online - Sen. Coburn intros amendment for vote-o-rama

Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) will introduce an amendment to create a publicly accessible online database containing all unclassified reports to Congress.  It will be offered during today's vote-o-rama, where unlimited amendments to the budget resolution being debated in the Senate are permissible.

Coburn Amendment #442 is the Senate equivalent of the Access to Congressionally Mandated Reports Act, which was re-introduced in the House earlier this week by Reps. Mike Quigley (D-IL) and Elijah Cummings (D-MD).

This idea is not new. We've been talking about it since 2008 and have advocated for it through its subsequent introduction and consideration. It is widely-support by transparency organizations from across the political spectrum.  Senator Coburn has long understood its importance, acting as a cosponsor of the Senate version of the ACMRA introduced in the 112th Congress.

Providing online access to all Congressionally mandated reports would allow watchdogs, the public and even members of Congress to more easily understand and conduct oversight on the operations of the federal government.

We hope that the amendment is successful today and that Senator Coburn continues to work towards this important goal by introducing a Senate version of the ACMRA to the 113th Congress.

Word Cloud of Senator Rand Paul's Filibuster

Word Cloud of Senator Rand Paul's filibuster of John Brennan's nomination to head the C.I.A.The Sunlight Foundation's Capitol Words project has finished processing Senator Rand Paul's filibuster of John Brennan's nomination to head the C.I.A. from the Congressional Record. We took the text of Sen. Paul's statements (not questions from other Senators) from the two sections of the record (filibuster start and the Unanimous Consent continuation) and created the above word cloud. Click through for the full-sized version.

Senator Tester Keeps Fighting the Good Fight for Transparency

Today, Senator Tester announced that once again he has introduced the Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act, (not yet online) a bill that would bring the Senate into the 21st Century by requiring senators and Senate candidates to electronically file their campaign finance reports with the Federal Election Commission.

The current filing system in place in the Senate would laughable if it weren’t so destructive to disclosure.  Senate candidates file their quarterly campaign finance reports with the Secretary of the Senate, who prints them out on reams of paper to be delivered to the Federal Election Commission. The FEC then inputs the information contained in those reports into its computer databases. Transparency delayed is transparency denied. The Senate system is anathema to anyone who supports meaningful disclosure.

House candidates and presidential candidates, by contrast, have been electronically filing their campaign finance reports for over a decade—streamlining the process and saving taxpayer money. It is estimated that the duplicative paper filing system in place in the Senate costs up to a half a million dollars annually.

Versions of the Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act have been introduced with significant bipartisan support in multiple prior congresses. No Senator that we know of has ever publicly opposed the legislation. The only reason the bill is not law is because it has been used for partisan political squabbles.  As the Senate struggles with massive challenges facing the country, from sequestration to guns to immigration, perhaps this year Senators can finally agree to enact a bill that no one can disagree with.

Why gun control faces an uphill battle in the Senate

As the Senate prepares to take up the first major gun control debate since last December's shooting massacre in Connecticut, a Sunlight Foundation analysis of the political pressures on 26 key senators paints a pessimistic picture for passage. Absent a major pressure campaign to push senators to support gun control legislation, the political calculus points against the Senate passing any reform.

The infographic below details the various pressures senators face on a gun control vote. We've collapsed the factors into a single Gun Reform Index, where 10 is most likely to support gun reform and 0 is least likely. The index ranks each senator relative to other key senators within their own party. More details and explanation follow the graphic.

KeyGunSenators(graphic by Amy Cesal and Alexander Furnas)

Read more

Senate Rules Changes: Sunlight's Proposals for the 113th Congress

The United States Senate is a creature of its rules. Through its standing rules, laws and resolutions, precedents, and the consent of its members, the upper chamber carefully controls how legislation can be promulgated and debate can take place.

Unlike the House of Representatives, which must vote on its rules every Congress, the Senate rarely reconsiders its standing rules in their entirety. An opportunity may arise, however, with the current debate over changing how the filibuster works. Here are Sunlight's major recommendations for updating the Senate's rules.

Read more

How Congress Cut its Policy Expertise

In the past 20 years, Congress has effectively allowed its legislative support branches to wither and stripped away its ability to process information. It has cut back its ability to review, contextualize, and evaluate information in a way that creates informed policy.

Lorelei Kelly, leader of the Smart Congress pilot project at the New America Foundation, looks into this trend in a new paper: "Congress' Wicked Problem." It explores topics we have discussed in a series of posts on the House and Senate.

She explains how much of the cutting to the policymaking infrastructure of Congress came in the mid-1990s. That was also the era of cutting the shared staff who had historically built knowledge and expertise around certain topics. Some members of Congress used these shared staff to their advantage, giving relatives and friends plum positions with little real work, but for the most part shared staff were a valuable asset.

A rule change in 1995 cut pooled funding for staff and essentially eviscerated the caucus system. Kelly does a fantastic job of explaining in detail what impacts that cut had, showing how the knowledge gap was filled with a new top-down system of information handed out by party leaders.

The paper makes an important distinction between information and knowledge in Congress. While lawmakers might receive plenty of information from lobbyists and interest groups, they have a weakened ability to seek other views and context for the flood of spin coming from K Street.

Another key change Kelly notes is the elimination of the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) in 1995. Congress created the nonpartisan agency in 1972 to look at the impacts of technology policy decisions. After OTA was cut, there were calls for lobbyists to fill the gap. Sunlight and others called for restoring funding to OTA or some other nonpartisan source of expertise.

We are glad to see someone exposing how Congress has weakened its ability to understand complex policy decisions, and we hope it will spark more discussion of what can be done to stop the cutting of knowledge.

Read more

When It Comes to Pay, All Feds Aren't Created Equal

By Daniel Schuman and Alisha Green 

It comes as little surprise to hill watchers that House staff are underpaid compared to their Senate equivalents, let alone executive branch and private sector staff, but we decided to dig a bit deeper. Just in time for the holidays (and those non-existent public sector bonuses) here's a comparison of key positions in the House, Senate, and executive branch. We admit that the data is a bit old, like the Ghost of the War on Christmas Past, but it's the best we can do with what’s available.

House-Senate-Exec-pay-chart-updated

The shaded areas in the bars for the executive branch staff show a range of potential pay.

Read more