The amount of money available for flagship transparency programs and how they will be funded is again the subject of controversy, with the White House rightly opposing Senate plans to cut funding and merge the initiatives with unrelated programs. The Statement of Administration Policy was issued last Thursday in response to appropriations bill HR 2354, the likely legislative vehicle through which the Senate will consider funding for Data.gov, USASpending.gov, the IT Dashboard, and other important transparency programs.

Thus far in the Senate, only the Senate Appropriations Committee has voted on funding levels for the E-Gov Fund, which provides funding for these transparency programs, and it did so in a process that was essentially closed to all other members of the Senate and to the public.

The Committee voted to combine the E-Gov Fund with the Federal Citizen Services Fund despite the funds having different purposes and raising questions about whether the combined fund would still be subject to the Electronic Government Act of 2002.

It also voted to deal the E-Gov Fund yet another funding hit. For both FY 2009 and FY 2010, the E-Gov fund was appropriated $34 million. Congressional wrangling for FY 2011 reduced E-Gov to $8 million, but with the promise that much of the funding would be restored. For FY 2012, the House Appropriations Committee  came through with a partial restoration, recommending overall E-Gov funding levels be set at approximately $16 million. Senate Appropriators, however, cut the E-Gov fund even further, down to a little more than $7 million.  Some programs already have been terminated, with many more on life support.

In response, today the Sunlight Foundation and OMB Watch released a letter to Senators calling on Congress to fully support the E-Gov Fund at $34 million, and to keep its money separate from the Federal Citizen Services Fund. The letter is below. More Sunlight reporting on our efforts to #savethedata is available here.

Take a few moments and call your Senator.

Letter to Senate on E-Gov Fund 2011-11-16

This Wednesday, the Senate Appropriations Committee will markup legislation that appropriates funding for the electronic government fund. The e-gov fund supports many of the Obama administration's flagship transparency initiatives, including data.gov, the IT spending dashboard, and USASpending.gov, as well as initiatives like data center consolidation. The House Appropriations Committee voted in June to reduce e-gov funding from $34m to $13-16m and to restructure it by rolling it into a broader "Information and Engagement for Citizens" fund.

The House's initially-proposed draconian cuts to the e-gov fund caused significant controversy, prompting Sunlight's #savethedata campaign, a public letter from major organizations and notable individuals, letters from Senator Tom Carper and former federal CIO Vivek Kundra, and statements from Rep. Darrell Issa,  Rep. Jose Serrano, and Sen. Joseph Lieberman.

It is unclear at this time whether the Senate will go along with the House's proposed restructuring of the fund as well as the disproportionate reduction in its funding levels. If the cuts go forward, new federal CIO Steven Van Roekel will make to make difficult decisions about which programs to cut or kill. We'll keep you posted.

This Thursday will be a important test of the House of Representative's commitment to fund key transparency programs like USASpending.gov, Data.gov, the IT Dashboard. That morning, a very influential subcommittee will debate and vote upon how much money should be made available to the Electronic Government Fund, which pays for these programs and others. In anticipation of the vote, the Sunlight Foundation and many other organizations and notable individuals are releasing a letter today that calls for the restoration of full funding to these transparency programs.

Although the e-gov fund was appropriated $34m in FY 2009 and 2010, it was cut to $8m after months of wrangling over the FY 2011 budget. Federal CIO Vivek Kundra has explained that at that funding level, "no project will go unaffected." It will likely mean the end of improvements to websites like USASpending.gov and Data.gov, worsening data quality, the release of fewer datasets, and the end of several programs.

A number of prominent members of Congress, including Reps. Darrell Issa and Jose Serrano and Sens. Joe Lieberman and Tom Carper, have spoken out in favor of the programs made possible by the e-gov fund. This year's dramatically diminished funding level has precipitously weakened these programs; if it continues, they will slip into a coma.

We will keep an eye on the House Appropriations Committee Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government hearing scheduled for this Thursday and let you know what happens. In the meantime, our joint letter is below.

House E-Gov Fund Sign-On letter

In the last few weeks there’s been a whirlwind of news and speculation about what will happen to the federal government’s online transparency efforts. From the first rumble of budget trouble to a frantic search for information on when the sites would go dark, and an extended legislative give-and-take over funding levels, the storm has cleared enough to know what’s left standing.

Although the future of online transparency is uncertain, what we can know for sure is that our collective efforts averted a disaster. A few programs will survive, with the immediate fate of online transparency in the hands of federal CIO Vivek Kundra and a few key legislators.

Congress and the President collectively cut the Electronic Government Fund from $34m in FY2010 to $8m in FY2011. For much of this past year, the e-gov fund kept the lights on with the fumes from last year’s funding combined with a little under $2m from this year’s funding and some fancy financial footwork. Don’t be misled by these (relatively) small numbers: all agencies dramatically reduced their expenditures and held off on new projects while Congress worked out a budget, so the amount already spent represents starvation levels. The famine may continue. Even though Congress is supposed to pass a new budget for 2012 by October 1, which would make new monies available, it’s highly doubtful that this will take place on time. The $6m-or-so may have to last a long time.

There is a glimmer of hope, however. Because of our collective effort to #savethedata -- with nearly 10,000 signatures to our letter to Congress -- instead of these transparency programs going dark (except a very basic version of USASpending.gov) as would have happened at the originally-proposed $2m level, more programs will survive. In addition, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Issa has made a personal pledge to use his reprogramming authority (i.e., the ability to shift funds around) to try and keep many sites alive; congressional leaders such as Sen. Lieberman and Rep. Serrano also have stressed the importance of these programs.

Even so, Vivek Kundra, the federal CIO and e-gov administrator, will now have to make some very difficult decisions about which programs to kill or curtail. Two programs, USASpending.gov and Performance.gov, were created by federal law and will likely have some kind of funding priority.

It’s going to be very hard to squeeze $34m work of programs into less than $8m worth of funding of which 1/4 is already spent. From what I’ve heard, keeping many of these programs supported at basic levels (including maintenance) would cost around $15-20m.

In order to keep these programs going, there are 3 strategies that may be employed. First, Mr. Kundra and OMB will “pass the hat,” which means that they will ask other agencies to help support some of these programs. Given the funding cuts that most agencies have sustained, this will be a difficult ask. Second, other agencies may be asked to take charge of (and funding responsibility for) programs close to their missions. Third, money will be shifted around in an attempt to keep priority programs alive until (hopefully) more money can be found in next year's budget. In light of the visions recently offered by both President Obama and House Republicans, we must ensure that transparency is more than a bipartisan talking point.

If we continue to keep up the pressure, and if transparency leaders continue to emerge from both sides of the aisle, we have a fighting chance to truly open up the government to the American people. The last few weeks show that success is possible.

For more information on the programs at stake, here’s the six major areas covered by the e-gov fund and the amount of money intended to support a year of operations for each category. Please note that this is a partial program list, and the numbers may be a bit off, but it's drawn from the best information available to me.

1. Improving Innovation, Efficiency and Effectiveness, and Federal IT ($10m)

• Cloud Computing -- supports government efforts to move to the cloud by addressing security, standards, and other issues
• Apps.gov (part of cloud computing) -- helps the government use cloud computing and social media by negotiating gov’t friendly contracts and creating an agency-facing storefront
• FedRamp (part of cloud computing) -- a unified government-wide risk management program that supports agency security services while reducing security burdens upon each individual agency
• Data center consolidation
• Mobile apps -- see http://apps.usa.gov/
• Data.gov innovations platform

2. Citizens Engagement Platform (CEP) Access / Web 2.0 ($5m)

• Apps.gov/now -- builds free agency-friendly engagement tools such as blogs, wikis, etc.
• Citizen Services Delivery Dashboard (not yet public) -- will track agency performance against customer service standards
• Challenge.gov -- puts all innovation prizes and challenges in one place

3. Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Implementation ($9.5m)

• USASpending.gov -- publishes federal spending on contracts and grants
• Sub-award recipient reporting (part of USASpending.gov) -- shows the sub-recipients for contracts and grants
• IT Dashboard -- reports on $80b in federal government IT funding and tracks performance
• Performance.gov (not yet public) -- tracks how agencies are performing against key metrics

4. Efficient Federal Workforce ($5m)

• Fedspace.gov -- a secure Intranet and collaboration workspace for federal employees across agencies

5. Accessible and Transparent Government Information / Data.gov ($3m)

• Data.gov -- helps the public access to high-value, machine readable databases

6. E-Gov Project Management Best Practices ($1.5m)

• 25 Point Plan to Reform Federal IT -- http://1.usa.gov/ezeKT8
• PaymentAccuracy.gov -- tracks the accuracy of payments made by the U.S. government & identifies high-error programs

As of this morning, more than 3,000 citizens have signed an open letter to Congress to save online transparency programs from a drastic budget cut; this is an increase of nearly 1,000 people in the last two days. Our message is catching on and Congress is starting to pay attention.

For example, Federal News Radio’s latest in a series of excellent reports shows that we have the attention of some of the House’s senior appropriators.

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, chairwoman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, referring to the House Republicans’ decision to propose a partial restoration of the E-Gov fund as part of a short term continuing resolution, was reported as saying:

I think there is an awful lot that is going to happen between now and when we finally get the government funded for the rest of this year and next year, but certainly there is a recognition that money was needed.

Rep. Jose Serrano, the ranking member of the same subcommittee, reportedly said last week:

The detrimental effect of HR 1 on so many areas of government is clear—and perhaps no more so than on the efforts to ensure the government's IT infrastructure upgrades are proceeding on schedule and on budget....We cannot have a more streamlined, efficient and open government without using the best technology available. Unfortunately the cuts in H.R. 1 to e-government fund will have the unintended consequence of making government less accountable and transparent.

Similarly, yesterday’s Federal News Radio report described GSA Administrator Martha Johnson as remarking that the “e-government fund is critical in keeping these open government tools helping citizens understand how the government works”.

We need to keep up the pressure. Follow the link to help save the data.

Public Letter: Save Online Transparency Programs (updated 4/2/2011)

This morning Sunlight is sending an open letter to Congress on behalf of 13 organizations and more than 2,000 signatories that calls on legislators to save online transparency programs from budget cuts. With thousands of tweets and phone calls, we’re keeping up the pressure, but more is needed if we are to prevent these programs from going dark. If you haven’t already, follow the link to sign our open letter or be put in contact with your representative.

The cost of defunding USASpending.gov, Data.gov, the IT Dashboard, and other programs is high. These e-government initiatives help the government operate more effectively and efficiently, saving taxpayer money and helping public oversight. They increase economic opportunities for small business. They also increase citizen knowledge of and involvement in the democratic process. An open and accountable government is a prerequisite for democracy

We’ve been receiving a lot of media coverage in the last few days -- NPR’s Marketplace, Le Monde, the Huffington Post, Politico, The Washington Examiner, The Dallas Morning News, and many others -- but it’s not enough.

Congress will debate a budget bill that could enact these cuts in the next few days, unless they punt for a week while behind-the-scenes negotiations finish playing out (or the negotiations collapse and the government shuts down.) In any scenario, now is the time to make Congress hear your voice, before it is too late. Keep up the pressure.

Save Online Transparency Programs

While members of Congress and the White House debate whether $33 billion is the right amount by which to cut the federal budget, the rest of us are focused on where these cuts will fall. For our part, we’re trying to save the $34 million that funds Obama-era tech innovations -- like Data.gov, USASpending.gov, and the IT Dashboard -- from the budget ax. And we’re not alone.

For example:

• The creator of the World Wide Web, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, is encouraging everyone to sign our open letter to Congress
• A bevy of editorials and news reports -- from the Washington Examiner to the Dallas Morning News to Federal News Radio to Read Write Web -- are drawing increasing attention to the cuts

• And we’re giving Charlie Sheen a run for his money with hundreds if not thousands of tweets at #savethedata (& we’re #winning!)

So how can you help? Go to our website to sign our letter to Congress, write a letter to the editor, and spread the word via Facebook or Twitter. For more information, read my original report, our open letter, and this update from yesterday.

Federal News Radio has an interesting follow-up to my interview with them yesterday on the budget technopocalypse. I wrote last week that Data.gov, USASpending.gov, and other Obama tech innovations face virtual extinction because it appears that Congress will cut their collective budgets from $34m to $2m. We and many others are sending an open letter to congress in an effort to save these vital transparency programs.

Federal News Radio executive editor Jason Miller reports on the stakes:

One government official, who requested anonymity because they didn't get permission to discuss the topic, said funding will begin to run out on April 20 for public sites IT Dashboard, Data.gov and paymentaccuracy.gov. The source said OMB also is planning on shutting down internal government sites, including Performance.gov, FedSpace and many of the efforts related the FEDRamp cloud computing cybersecurity effort.

The official said two other sites, USASpending.gov and Apps.gov/now, will run through July 30 but go dark soon after. "We need at least another $4 million just to keep USASpending.gov operating this year," the official said. "We are looking at a pass-the-hat approach, but it could be challenging to get that done in time."

Rep. Serrano weighed in:

"The detrimental effect of HR 1 on so many areas of government is clear—and perhaps no more so than on the efforts to ensure the government's IT infrastructure upgrades are proceeding on schedule and on budget," said Rep. Jose Serrano (D-N.Y.), ranking member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government. "We cannot have a more streamlined, efficient and open government without using the best technology available. Unfortunately the cuts in H.R. 1 to e-government fund will have the unintended consequence of making government less accountable and transparent."

As did Senator Lieberman:

"Economic conditions demand wise budget decisions, but cutting money from multiple federal IT programs is penny-wise and pound foolish," said Leslie Phillips, a spokeswoman for the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which Lieberman is the chairman of. "Programs that modernize technology ultimately improve management and save taxpayers billions of dollars. Transparency and e-government programs encourage public participation in government. Small investments in IT modernization can reap enormous rewards, which is why Senator Lieberman opposes the proposed cuts to the e-gov fund and the administration's IT reform efforts."

I’ll keep you updated as developments happen.

Today we are releasing an open letter to congressional leaders in an effort to save vital transparency programs. In light of quickly evolving circumstances, we prepared the following document and are encouraging organizations and individuals to sign-on. Please add your names and organizations in the comments. Later on we will transmit the final version with the signatories.

Last week I wrote about proposed cuts to the Electronic Government Fund that would effectively defund Data.gov, USASpending.gov, the IT Dashboard, and other programs. Time is running out for Congress to pass a budget for FY 2011, and a rush to avert a government shutdown may result in these programs falling by the wayside. We cannot afford to let the government's transparency efforts go dark.

Open Letter: Congress Must Protect Transparency Programs in Budget Negotiations

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."