The Associated Press reported that the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will investigate how a huge loophole in federal overseas contracting was slipped into regulations being drafted to limit waste and fraud in government-funded projects. The regulations, when enacted, will require contractors to establish and maintain specific internal controls to detect and prevent improper conduct in connection with a government contract. The loophole would specifically exempt contracts performed entirely outside the U.S.
According to the report, the Committee will "look at whether the exemption was added at the request of private firms, or their lobbyists, to escape having to report abuse in U.S. contracts performed abroad."
It's a good question, but, as long as we are on the subject of waste, we would suggest a simple fix that could lead directly to an answer, without spending taxpayer dollars on document reviews, staff interviews, subpoenas, hearings and testimony stemming from an investigation. If Congress had enacted H.R. 984, Congressman Waxman's Executive Branch Reform Act, a few keystrokes on a computer might provide us with an answer as to whether a firm or lobbyist requested the exemption.
Instant Analysis from MAPLight.org
The House of Representatives passed the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007 (H.R. 1424) yesterday, a bill that would require group health insurance plans to cover mental health and substance-abuse cases just like other medical issues, a significant change over the current system. And thanks to MAPLight.org, the brilliant money-fand-votes tracker (and Sunlight grantee), we have a much better view of how the various interests attempt to influence legislative outcomes.
MAPLight.org analyzed the giving of those groups in real time, releasing immediately after the vote their analysis. (I'm just delayed in posting!) They found that those "interested" in the legislation, both pro and con, gave over $8,000 more to the individual legislators who voted the way they wanted them to. A press release from Maplight.org gives more detail:
Opponents--such as Accident and Health Insurance, Big Business, Chambers of Commerce, Restaurant and Manufacturing, Retail and Wholesale Trade gave an average of $22,693 to legislators who voted No on this bill, compared to $14,183 to legislators who voted Yes. The disparity is 160% more money given to a No vote.
Supporters--such as Health and Welfare, Mental Health care-givers, Mental Health Services, Clergy and Non-profit--gave an average of $4,242 to legislators who voted Yes on this bill, compared to $1,812 to legislators who voted No. The disparity is 234% more money given to a Yes vote, or $2,430.
MAPLight.org looks at correlations between campaign contributions and legislation, giving citizens key information to allow them to "draw their own conclusions about how campaign contributions affect policy," Dan Newman, MAPLight.org's director, said in the release.
Continue readingA SuperDelegate Widget
Check out the SuperDelegate Widget over at Congresspedia.
New Lobbyist Disclosure Rules Under Attack
Last Friday, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed an amicus brief in support of the disclosure requirements of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 (HLOGA), joining the Campaign Legal Center, Democracy 21 and Public Citizen in defending the disclosure provisions. All were in response to the National Association of Manufacturers who earlier in February had filed suit in federal court challenging the disclosure provisions and saying they are "vague, overbroad and burdensome" and were in violation of the First Amendment.
HLOGA requires any organization actively participating "in the planning, supervision, or control" of lobbying efforts that ponies up more than $5,000 in a quarter to disclose their activities and expenditures. The law's purpose is to shine a light on stealth lobbying and sham coalitions, pushing legislation such as those that are often promoted by groups like NAM. The law's criminal penalties on groups that fail to accurately disclose their lobby efforts succeeded at getting their attention. NAM says that the clause in question is imprecise and impacts groups that it is not intended to target. They fear the law will also require it to disclose the names of its members. NAM has requested the court issue a preliminary injunction on the disclosure rules until the court decides the case.
Continue readingFile This Under “Cool”
At Wired magazine, Tim McKeough has pulled together a fascinating and beautiful slide show he titled "Frame that Spam! Data-Crunching Artists Transform the World of Information" where he displays the works of a new crop of data-crunching "artists" who are using data the same way "Picasso applied paint." The artists used blog posts, traffic patterns, government reports digital video, and email to transform "the world of information into mesmerizing abstractions."
These pieces of art and graphic design are amazingly beautiful, but they aren't just "eye candy," as McKeough writes. The artists used census data, NASA images, and even human emotion samples from the blogosphere to display the information in an interactive and insightful manner. And it's only the beginning of what the Web 2.0 revolution will do with information as it evolves.
Continue readingLawrence Lessig Featured in Sunshine Week Lecture
Larry Lessig, renowned expert in intellectual property and Sunlight Advisory Board member, will launch his new "Change Congress" project in a Sunshine Week lecture on March 20. In this lecture -- sponsored by Sunlight and Omidyar Network -- Lessig will describe his decision to focus his academic interests on the issue of the systemic corruption of American democracy. He will explore the ways in which our democracy is threatened by corruption and ways we, as citizens, can respond.
The event will be held at the National Press Club from 1:30 to 3 PM on March 20th, in Murrow White and Lisagor Rooms and it will be Webcast.
Space is limited so RSVP soon.
Over at the SuperDelegate Transparency Project . . .
The issue of SuperDelegates is really heating up. The group of citizen journalists, bloggers and activists convened over at the SuperDelegate Transparency Project (hosted by Congresspedia) have produced the only reporting on SuperDelegate commitments in the race for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination that is fully broken down by delegate, by state,congressional district and has full and transparent sourcing. No major news organization provides such detail or provides their sources.
The SuperDelegate Transparency Project is the only citizen-driven, grassroots effort bringing transparency to the SuperDelegate process. While major news organizations and political Web sites provide unsourced and conflicting delegate and SuperDelegate counts, STP has consistently provided delegate-by-delegate breakdowns of endorsements, all with fully transparent sourcing. The project, whichcounts more than 400 volunteers, is dedicated to bringing greater transparency to the Democratic nomination process.
Check it out and add what you know.
Continue readingGAO’s Oversight of NSA. Not.
Steven Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists, writing at Secrecy News, reports that the Congress has not used the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) to perform any oversight of the National Security Agency (NSA), despite maintaining an office there to do just that.
Continue readingDespite multi-billion dollar acquisition failures at NSA and the Agency's controversial, possibly illegal surveillance practices . . .Congress has declined to summon all of its oversight resources such as GAO to address such issues.
Corruption Amidst the Stacks
The fundraising for presidential libraries continues to be a blind spot when it comes to disclosure and an open and transparent government. Unlike contributions to an electoral campaign, gifts to the libraries are unlimited and undisclosed, and they can take money from corporations and foreign governments. This is worth repeating: Presidential libraries have no restrictions on the size of financial contributions they can receive, and they are not required to report who their contributors are. Plus, they can receive gifts from corporations and foreign governments! It is illegal for political campaigns to receive contributions from corporations and foreign governments. And another egregious aspect of presidential library fundraising that all of this unlimited, undisclosed fundraising involving corporations and foreign governments is going on while the nation's chief executive is still in office...The most powerful man or woman in the world. As Sheila Krumholz, director of the Center for Responsive Politics and friend, said in testimony to Congress in February 2007, "The potential (for corruption with the libraries) may be far greater than in the campaign finance system."
Continue readingGrading the States
The Pew Center on the States released their new Grading the States 2008 Report they produced with Governing magazine where they give letter grades to each state based on how well they manage budgets, staffs, infrastructure and information, according to today's AP article. A panel of state government experts determined the grades. Pew has said they hope the rankings will give states objective information on how they can perform better in the future.
Continue reading
59063
