News
Sep 18 2006
Editorial: Transparency in spending
What a great idea: Create a searchable online data base of federal grants and contracts, identifying the members of Congress behind the spending, so that citizens, even on their home computers, can easily determine where, how and why the government is spending their money. A bill to do just that, sponsored by Sen. Tom Coburn (R.-Okla.), with the bipartisan support of such heavy hitters as Majority Leader Bill Frist (R.-Tenn.), Minority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.), Hillary Clinton (D.-N.Y.) and John McCain (R.-Ariz.), has passed the Senate and may soon become law.
For a time it looked dicey. In an impressive display of the arrogance of power, two of Congress's most egregious kings of pork -- Senators Ted Stevens (R.-Alaska) and Robert Byrd (D.-W.Va.) -- secretly put a hold on the legislation. After citizens groups smoked out this betrayal of the public, Mr. Byrd and Mr. Stevens backed off.
Senator Stevens said he was concerned about the $4 million that it would cost to create the data base, and the $2 million a year to administer it.
What a joke! He and Alaska Congressman Don Young, another Republican, are, of course, behind the $320 million "bridge to nowhere" in his home state, a notorious example of flagrant waste but perhaps not unexpected in America's biggest per-capita recipient of federal goodies -- Alaska.
The truth is, such a data base would save money, by equipping the public (and potential challengers) with knowledge about what really goes on in Washington. That could shame incumbents into backing off grotesquely wasteful projects that they know would subject them to national ridicule or grief in elections, or expose corrupt ties.
Of course, money is power, and billions of dollars poured into pork-barrel projects have helped "conservative" Republicans, for all their talk about wasteful government, win re-elections and retain control of the Senate. (Human nature, we concede.)
That may be why liberal Democrats have joined with conservatives on the bill. It presents an opportunity to break the deathgrip of incumbency.
Mr. Coburn and the co-sponsor, Sen. Barak Obama (D.-Ill.), deserve credit for fighting doggedly for this legislation, which was expected to pass the House.
Meanwhile, another good idea: States should follow suit. In the age of the computer, citizens should have easy access to information about who is spending their money, how -- and why.
For a time it looked dicey. In an impressive display of the arrogance of power, two of Congress's most egregious kings of pork -- Senators Ted Stevens (R.-Alaska) and Robert Byrd (D.-W.Va.) -- secretly put a hold on the legislation. After citizens groups smoked out this betrayal of the public, Mr. Byrd and Mr. Stevens backed off.
Senator Stevens said he was concerned about the $4 million that it would cost to create the data base, and the $2 million a year to administer it.
What a joke! He and Alaska Congressman Don Young, another Republican, are, of course, behind the $320 million "bridge to nowhere" in his home state, a notorious example of flagrant waste but perhaps not unexpected in America's biggest per-capita recipient of federal goodies -- Alaska.
The truth is, such a data base would save money, by equipping the public (and potential challengers) with knowledge about what really goes on in Washington. That could shame incumbents into backing off grotesquely wasteful projects that they know would subject them to national ridicule or grief in elections, or expose corrupt ties.
Of course, money is power, and billions of dollars poured into pork-barrel projects have helped "conservative" Republicans, for all their talk about wasteful government, win re-elections and retain control of the Senate. (Human nature, we concede.)
That may be why liberal Democrats have joined with conservatives on the bill. It presents an opportunity to break the deathgrip of incumbency.
Mr. Coburn and the co-sponsor, Sen. Barak Obama (D.-Ill.), deserve credit for fighting doggedly for this legislation, which was expected to pass the House.
Meanwhile, another good idea: States should follow suit. In the age of the computer, citizens should have easy access to information about who is spending their money, how -- and why.
