The first thing to admit is that the title of this post might be a bit misleading. While in the last few months Sunlight was indeed busy researching procurement transparency on many different levels, we’ve never had the intention (or the power) to do holistic international research on procurement transparency, nor did we want to rank countries based on their performance. This would have been an endless - and probably pointless - effort. Our motive behind mapping the global landscape of procurement disclosure trends was to find best practices, powerful online tools and also to gain inspiration for Sunlight’s recently released open data guidelines for procurements.
Continue readingGovernment APIs Aren’t A Backup Plan
When the government shuts down and takes most of its data with it, the public needs to have a backup plan.
Continue readingBreaking the limit: How the stealthy wealthy engaged in checkbook lobbying
Striking down the limits on how many federal candidates and party committees an individual can shower with campaign cash--the main issues in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission--would not only open the door to bigger money in politics, it could also open the door to stealth lobbying campaigns on Capitol Hill by well-heeled donors. We know that because it already has happened, when limits were in place but not enforced. More than two decades ago, when Congress considered reforms that would put the brakes on hostile takeovers by corporate raiders, some of them used their checkbooks and their access to derail the effort without ever disclosing their lobbying efforts. Back in 1989, federal election law limited the amount an individual could give to candidates, parties and political action committees to $25,000. That year Texas billionaire and corporate takeover artist Harold C. Simmons contributed $45,500. That year Simmons, a staunch Republican now best known for seven-figure contributions to groups like Swift Boat Vets for Truth and American Crossroads, gave plenty to GOP pols. But, unusual for him, he also wrote $1,000 checks to Democratic stalwarts like Sens. David Boren, D-Okla., Paul Simon, D-Ill., and Max Baucus, D-Mont., as well as a $15,000 check to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
Texas billionaire Harold C. Simmons
The 1,000 donors most likely to benefit from McCutcheon — and what they are most likely to do
If the Supreme Court lifts limits on aggregate individual campaign contributions, as it may very likely do in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, it will empower the limited number of donors who have the heart, the stomach and the bankrolls to contribute hundreds of thousands of their own money to determine who is in office. These truly elite donors are poised to be the big winners.
In our recent analysis on the 1% of the 1%, we looked at the top 31,385 donors (.01% of the U.S. population). Today, we will focus just on the top 1,000 donors: the donors most likely to up their political giving if they are given the chance to donate even more. All of these donors contributed at least $134,300 of their own money in the 2012 election.
Our best guess is that parties and leadership committees will converge on these donors, giving roughly 1000 people a unique ability to set and limit the party agendas. Presumably, they will shift their money from super PACs to party committees because giving directly to party and leadership committees affords these donors more opportunities to talk directly to party leaders, and increases their bargaining power within the party structure. And party leaders want to control the money and the messages it buys.
2. Almost 2/3 of the Top 1,000 donors primarily support Republicans
How to Actually Improve Public Access to Government Documents (Under the FOIA)
When can a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request be worth millions of dollars? When it is made by an investment company hoping to gain information about potential stock purchases (and sales). A recent Wall Street Journal article details the use of FOIA requests by investment firms. These firms make document requests to ascertain potential corporate liabilities and successes, requesting, for example, documents detailing Food and Drug Administration inspections and customer complaints about consumer products and pharmaceuticals. To be clear, what the Wall Street Journal describes appears to be perfectly legal - just another form of research conducted by companies that are doing their due diligence before making large scale investments.
But it has touched a nerve within the open government community. Open government advocates argue that the investment firms are taking advantage of the FOIA in order to gain insider information that only benefits the firm and is never shared the public at large. It raises complex questions when a public interest law is used to create private gain, even though the FOIA originally accounted for commercial requesters.
Seeing potential gains in efficiency, accountability, and fairness, FOIA reformers see stories like this one as opportunities to propose new FOIA procedures to promote public access.
Continue readingWord Cloud of Senator Cruz’s Obamacare Speech
Senator Ted Cruz's speech about Obamacare where he held the floor for 21 hours and 19 minutes is available for analysis using the Sunlight Foundation's Capitol Words project.
Continue readingThe Politics of the Government Shutdown – In One Chart
As the government shutdown begins, so does the blame game. Is it Republicans’ fault? Democrats’ fault? While the endless speculation keeps pundits busy, it’s important to remember that members of Congress don’t care about “the public” in the abstract. They care about the public in their district.
We say “district” because any deal to re-start the government will require agreement by both the House and the Senate. While senators, with their broader constituencies, have to worry more about voters in the center, no such pressure exists for most House members. A quick analysis finds roughly seven in eight House Republicans (86.6 percent, to be exact, or 201 of 232) won with at least 55 percent of the vote in 2012. Additionally, 140 Republicans (60.3 percent of the caucus) won with at least 60 percent of the vote. The chart below shows the distribution of seats by margin of victory. Note: most Democrats also come from safe seats.
How many donors will benefit if the Supreme Court allows unlimited campaign contributions?
Yesterday, my colleague Lisa Rosenberg previewed what’s at stake in the upcoming Supreme Court case, McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission. On Oct. 8, judges will rule on the constitutionality of the overall limit on contributions to federal candidates and political parties. Currently, the limits are set at $74,600 to political committees, and $48,600 to candidates – $123,200 overall. If the court sides with the plaintiffs, those limits will be a thing of the past.
Everybody is buzzing about what will happen if the courts lift the aggregate limits. Will more donors start writing multi-million dollar checks? Will the campaign finance system flood with even more money?
Today in #OpenGov 9/30/13
National News
- Decisions about how to fund the government -- and whether the 2010 health care law would be impacted -- are expected to be tossed from the Senate back to the House today after a quiet Sunday at the Capitol. If the House and Senate cannot work out a deal on the budget today, the U.S. government is poised for the first shutdown in nearly 20 years. (Washington Post)
- The National Security Agency has been using the data collected on U.S. citizens to create charts of their social connections. The agency is using communication data along with information from social media profiles, bank accounts, passenger manifests, and GPS locations, among other things, to chart connections between people. (New York Times)
- The Justice Department is moving to sue North Carolina over the state's voter ID law, following a decision last month to sue Texas for a similar measure. (Washington Post)
- Saturday was International Right to Know Day, and events focused on improving access to information took place in countries across the world. There is a Google map tracking these events. (MySociety)
- The Washington-area economy could lose $200 million each day if the federal government does shut down. Mayor Vincent Gray is hoping to mitigate the impacts on the District's workforce by declaring all of its employees essential, meaning they would be able to keep working through a shutdown. (Washington Post)
- Census numbers show the total number of local governments increased slightly over the last five years, even as revenues shrank across every level. The Census showed more than 90,000 local governments in 2012. (Pew States)
- Civic hackers in Vermont are preparing to use approved datasets to make apps that they hope will improve the quality of government processes -- and the economy. The hackathon, HackVT, is scheduled for Oct. 11-12. (Motherboard)
- San Francisco is now home to a new headquarters for GitHub, the platform that is also hosting the city's newly opened municipal code. Posting San Francisco's code online in a more user-friendly format is the result of working with GitHub, OpenGov Foundation, and other groups. (GovFresh)
Supreme Court Could Snuff Out Last Ember of the Campaign Finance System
On Oct. 8, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, a case in which the plaintiff, Shaun McCutcheon, joined by the Republican National Committee, is challenging the constitutionality of the overall limit on contributions to federal candidates and political parties. If the court rules in favor of McCutcheon and the RNC, it might as well tie a big bow around Congress and deliver it to a tiny percentage of the very, very rich.
Plutocracy anyone?
59063
