Congress sends financial transparency bill to White House [Coburn Earmark Bill Passes House]

The House ^ | September 14, 2006 | Matthew Weigelt

[RobFromGa]

Congress sends financial transparency bill to White House

BY Matthew Weigelt Published on Sept. 14, 2006 Congress is sending legislation to President Bush that would require the Office of Management and Budget to build a publicly accessible online database of who receives federal money.

The House passed by voice vote the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (S. 2590) Sept. 13.

“Sunshine is the best disinfectant,” said Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.), chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, on the House floor.

Earlier this year, Davis and Majority Whip Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) introduced a similar bill, which the House passed. The Blunt-Davis bill dealt only with federal grants, while the Senate bill expanded to cover contracting funds.

“The American taxpayers deserve to know how their money is being used, and they are right to expect that it be used responsibly to achieve results,” said OMB Director Rob Portman in a statement.

The bill would create a Google-like search engine and database to track about $1 trillion in federal grants, contracts, earmarks and loans.

Rep. Danny Davis (D-Ill.), a supporter of the bill, said the key to success is implementation. “Without it, we will be where we are now with poor access to information,” he said. If done well, the public will increase its oversight of federal spending, he added.

The mandated Web site would show how much funding an organization received in each of the past 10 fiscal years, a breakdown of the transactions and details about the organization.

“The group that deserves credit for passing this bill, however, is not Congress, but the army of bloggers and concerned citizens who told Congress that transparency is a just demand for all citizens, not a special privilege for political insiders,” said the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.).

The legislation faced big obstacles. Several senators had placed holds on it, blocking it from floor consideration. Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) admitted to doing so, and Coburn’s staff suspected that Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) also had, according to a statement. The holds were later released.

Coburn said bloggers had hounded senators until the field was narrowed to a few suspects. Reports state that they contacted every senator’s office to determine who had placed holds.

“When you can’t find where the money goes, it is impossible to do responsible legislation and absolutely impossible to do responsible oversight,” said Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.) on the House floor.

[RobFromGa]

I couldn't find this posted, this is a major victory for TAX-CUTTING

[RobFromGa]

MAJOR VICTORY FOR SPENDING CONTROL!

Coburn Transparency Bill Passes the House
Andrew Roth {ClubFroGrowth]


Wow! The Coburn transparency bill has passed the House. This was expected, of course, but what I'm surprised and relieved about is that this is finally the culmination of a long, strange trip. With Senator Tom Coburn's help, the blogosphere literally picked up this bill and carried it through the Senate and the House and is now delivering it to the White House for President Bush's signature.

Let me say one other thing about this bill. When senators are first elected, they are immediately indoctrinated into the upper chamber's "go along to get along" way of doing business. Tom Coburn did NOT do that. He hit the ground running when he was elected in 2004 and has been a breath of fresh air for taxpayers. Instead of playing the back-scratching game of old school politics, he challenged the old bulls in the Senate by going after massive pork projects like the "Bridge to Nowhere".

Most people would have concluded that after that, Coburn would be relegated to the corner, perceived as too rebellious to be included in big legislative decisions. Attacking the Bridge to Nowhere would cost him. He'd be punished for his mutinous behavior. And in the end, maybe he was, but it didn't bother him one bit. He kept slogging forward, he kept fighting for taxpayers. And now he has helped steer a major piece of legislation to victory that will effectively pry open the doors to the Big Sausage Factory. More importantly, he's invited the entire country to walk through those doors to conduct a thorough health inspection.

We may very well look back on this day and realize that this was the moment that Old Bull Politics in the mold of Ted Stevens and Robert Byrd died and a new era was born in which citizens demand and require complete transparency in government. This bill was the catalyst to making that happen.

[RobFromGa]

Now it goes to the President for his signature...

[CDHart]

bttt

[OldFriend]

This is the final bill. It's out of the Senate?

AMAZING

[yellowdoghunter]

Thanks for this post. What wonderful news! Your comments concerning Coburn are very true. I also hope people realize that he is not treated very nice by his fellow collegues. He is relegated to the corner, so to speak. But it does not bother him one bit that he is not popular with other Senators, he is not there to serve him. I get on my knees and thank God for Senator Coburn, I wish we had 100 more like him.

Keep stirring things up, Mr. Coburn, keep their feet to the fire!

[2Jedismom]

“The group that deserves credit for passing this bill, however, is not Congress, but the army of bloggers and concerned citizens who told Congress that transparency is a just demand for all citizens, not a special privilege for political insiders,” said the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.)

Oklahoma Ping!

If you want on
or off this list
Freepmail me.

[MplsSteve]

I agree.

The Senate needs more members like Tom Coburn.

[RobFromGa]

Link to the House bill H.R.1000 is below. Senator Coburn already got it passed in the Senate. It is going to the President for approval NOW.

KEY VOTE ALERT
"YES" ON EARMARK REFORM (H.RES. 1000)

Wasteful spending in Washington has spiraled out of control over the last several years. Just in appropriations bills, money spent on pork projects has gone from "only" 4,326 earmarks worth $17.7 billion in 2000 to 13,997 projects worth $27.3 billion in 2005, according to Citizens Against Government Waste. And that doesn't include authorization bills like the 2005 Highway Bill, which included over 6,000 earmarks totaling a whopping $24 billion.

While the earmark reform resolution isn't a perfect solution to the egregious spending problem, it is a solid first step at shedding some light on the earmarking process, which is without oversight and accountability and is an enabling "currency of corruption" in Washington.

[PAR35]

They probably won't fund it, and the legislation probably won't be implemented.

Do you actually trust the Dcmicans and Republocrats to carry through?

[RobFromGa]

Of course not, we should all just give up and move to France. You first.

[FreePaul]

Let's wait on the congratulations. The objective is not passing a bill. The objective is stopping reckless, under the table spending. Will it stop? Not if our elected representatives have anything to say about it. It's a start anyway.

[RobFromGa]

More doom and gloom. Who's Paul?

[RobFromGa]

Earmark Reform: How the New Rule Works

Details and Definitions

• In order for the House to consider a bill, the Committee of jurisdiction must list all earmarks included in the bill and committee report along with the names of Members requesting the earmark. This new provision applies to ALL Committees.
  
  
• In the case of tax bills, the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) is specifically charged with compiling the list because of intricacies involved in scoring the impact of a tax provision.
  
  
• In the case of a conference report, the list must include any earmarks (with Member names) that were "airdropped" into the conference report or joint statement of managers.
  
  
• If an authorizing committee or the Appropriations Committee fails to include a list of earmarks, a Member can raise a point of order against consideration of the bill or conference report. The point of order is debatable for 30 minutes – 15 minutes equally divided.
  
  
• If the Ways and Means Committee fails to include a JCT list of earmarks or a JCT statement indicating that there are no earmarks, a Member can raise a point of order against consideration of the bill or conference report. The point of order is not debatable.
  
  
• If a rule providing for the consideration of a conference report waives the requirement for a list of new earmarks, then the point of order would lie against the Rule.
  
  
• If the House rejects the question of consideration, the House is not allowed to consider the legislation or the rule providing for its consideration of the legislation until a list of earmarks is included.
  
  
• An authorizing earmark is a provision that permits funds to be allocated outside of the normal formula-driven or competitive bidding process and to be targeted to a specific entity, State, or Congressional district.
  
  
• An appropriations earmark is a provision that allocates funds outside of the normal formula-driven or competitive bidding process and targets those funds to a specific entity, State, or Congressional district.
  
  
• A tax earmark, as determined by the Joint Committee on Taxation, is defined as any revenue-losing provision that provides a Federal tax deduction, credit, exclusion, or preference to only one beneficiary.

[jonascord]

The thieves will have to find another loophole to hide payoffs to the folks back home.

I've always felt that it would be interesting to put forward a bill that demands a life sentence without parole for any public servant who gets caught with his hand in the cookie jar. I always thought it would be neat to hear from our legislators why this wouldn't be a good idea. I also think it would either get us a cleaner government or a smarter bunch of crooks...

[E.G.C.]

BTTT

[Gvl_M3]

Thanks for the update on this.

As I'm at work, I don't have time to research my own answers, so please indulge me.

Is there a time-line to get this started?

Is there a budget for it?

Thanks again.

[RobFromGa]

Congress to Open Tax Money Tracking Site

Thursday, September 14, 2006

By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON — From $500,000 for a teapot museum in North Carolina to $450,000 for plants on the east side of the Capitol, the federal government spends hundreds of billions every year for grants, contracts, earmarks and loans. With creation of a new federal Web site, citizens will at least be able to see where some of their tax money goes.

The House on Wednesday passed by voice vote and sent to President Bush legislation to create a Web site that will give people ready access to information on the $300 billion in grants issued to some 30,000 organizations annually, and the roughly 1 million contracts exceeding a $25,000 threshold.

"It's a great, bipartisan plan to make sure tax dollars are spent wisely,"said House Majority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo.

Bush, in a statement, welcomed the bill, saying it showed the commitment of Congress"to giving the American people access to timely and accurate information about how their tax dollars are spent."

The vote for a more open federal account book was a victory for lawmakers whose reputations have suffered this year from lobbying scandals and outcries over growing porkbarrel spending.

But the House continued to struggle over another open-government measure _ to bring light to the special projects or"earmarks"that lawmakers insert in larger bills. And the House and Senate have been deadlocked for months over a more comprehensive lobbying reform bill growing out of the scandals earlier this year linked to former lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

The House was scheduled to take up a measure Thursday requiring lists of those inserting earmarks in legislation, although there was dissension among the Republican ranks about details of the rules change. Members of the Appropriations Committee were insisting that the new rules apply equally to committees covering tax bills and authorization bills.

The database bill would require the White House Office of Management and Budget to set up a Google-like, user-friendly Web site by Jan. 1, 2008, that would provide easy access to information about grants andcontracts.

Users will be able to type in"Halliburton"or"Planned Parenthood,"for instance, to find out what kind of contracts or grants have been awarded such companies or groups. They can also do a search for a specific state or district to see what kind of money is flowing from Washington.

They could check on earmarks in a highway bill last year such as the $200 million approved for a bridge in a sparsely populated area of Alaska or the defense contracts that proved the undoing of former Rep. Randy"Duke"Cunningham. The California Republican was sentenced to eight years in prison earlier this year for taking bribes in exchange for steering contracts to a company.

"This bill will make tracking government spending easier for citizens, reporters and legislators alike,"the Senate sponsors, Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Barack Obama, D-Ill., said in a statement."Improving transparency will force lawmakers to be more accountable to the American people."

In 2009 the Web site is scheduled to add a feature to help pinpoint subcontracts, an area that tends to be less visible to the public and is thus more susceptible to waste and abuse.

"It's a tremendous tool in the arsenal for budget watchdogs,"said Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense. He said it was the"biggest leap for transparency in government"since Congress created its own Web site,http://thomas.loc.gov/.

[RobFromGa]

This is based on yesterdays database bill passage, then they passed the earmark identification part today.-- RFG

Trimming the pork: Congress unsheathes the knife

SERIOUS REFORM of Washington's disgusting pork-barrel process has actually made it to the light of day. Who'd have thought?

Yesterday the House approved a fantastic reform bill to create a searchable database of pork projects. Citizens can use the online program to find out exactly how many of their tax dollars went to any corporation or non-profit group. The bill passed the Senate last week.

Today the House considers a rules change that would force the disclosure of all spending and tax-break pork. Under the new rule, representatives could no longer hide their bacon. If they insert an appropriation for Uncle Fred's Earwax Museum or a tax break for a campaign donor's business, everyone will know about it.

Democrats whine that these reforms don't go far enough. They underestimate the power of public scrutiny.

Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee are fabricating as many excuses as they can to oppose the rule change. They understand what it means: When the public gets a peek inside the committee's closed doors, the people will not like what they see.

When it comes to government, sunshine is indeed the best disinfectant. The searchable pork database bill was held up in the Senate by Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, and Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., the Senate's great kings of pork. Each senator placed a secret hold on the legislation, which prevented it from coming up for a vote. Then the bloggers got involved.

In no time, bloggers revealed that Stevens and Byrd were the senators trying in secret to kill the bill. With the curtain pulled away, the senators dropped their holds and the bill went on to pass.

Exposing the pork-barrel process to public scrutiny will have a similar effect. It won't end pork, but it should trim it. And that will be a victory for the taxpayer. House members need to vote today to approve the rule change. Those who don't will be exposed for what they are: enemies of the taxpayer.