Showing posts with label OMB Watch. Show all posts
Showing posts with label OMB Watch. Show all posts

Saturday, March 28, 2009

Help and hold accountable the Obama administration's economic recovery efforts


WASHINGTON - JANUARY 28:  U.S. Treasury Secret...US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. Image by Getty Images via Daylife

Government reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From:
OMB Watch



More than $8 trillion is being spent to rescue the financial sector and stimulate the economy. Who’s getting it? How is it being spent? Is the Recovery Act money saving or creating jobs and what kind of jobs? Is the bailout money generating new loans, and if so, who is getting them?

A contribution to OMB Watch now will help us stay on the beat to ensure the Obama administration answers these types of questions.

The Obama administration has done a remarkable job in creating Recovery.gov and moving money to the states and localities since the Recovery Act was signed into law. Moreover, President Obama has put into motion the beginnings of policies that bring an unprecedented presumption of openness in the way government operates.

Notwithstanding the positive first steps by President Obama, Recovery.gov has not yet lived up to its potential. It is will take a concerted effort from across political lines to build a truly transparent and accountable government.

In this video, I share with you three strategies needed to transform government: changing policies, improving technology, and replacing the culture of secrecy in government with one that prizes disclosure.

OMB Watch, with more than 25 years of experience and expertise, has stepped forward to both help and hold accountable the new administration. Engaging people and organizations across the ideological spectrum, we have two new projects:

Bailout Watch is a partnership with six other organizations that is researching, investigating, and analyzing the federal government's financial bailout activities. Everything we learn will be published so that you will see it, too. Soon we will be reaching out to you to build a broader coalition that reminds the federal government and Wall Street that the bailout should help all Americans, not just wealthy traders and businesses.

The Coalition for an Accountable Recovery (CAR) is comprised of more than 30 organizations to promote transparency and accountability policies and practices for national and state government agencies and contractors that benefit from recovery spending. You can join CAR by signing up online.

Give todayfor a transformed tomorrow through transparency!

Truly Yours, Gary's Signature Gary D. Bass OMB Watch, Executive Director

P.S. A gift of $25.00 or more will help CAR and Bailout Watch work for you!

[Original OMB Watch article accepts comments]


>All Things Reform Mobile: allthingsreform.mofuse.mobi >Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 (not toll-free) >US House/Senate Mobile: bit.ly/members >Contact your reps tips: bit.ly/dear >Shortened All Things Reform URL: bit.ly/dw


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Monday, March 23, 2009

Contact your US Senators to oppose inclusion of language like the Foxx amendment in S. 277



{{w|Virginia Foxx}}, member of the United Stat...US Rep. Virginia Foxx R-NC. Image via Wikipedia

Government reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From:
OMB Watch


March 23, 2009



Please circulate this to others.

Today, the Senate is set to take up the Serve America Act (S. 277). S. 277 amends the National and Community Service Act of 1990 and will create two new service-learning programs.

Unfortunately, the House-passed version of the bill, the GIVE Act (H.R. 1388), includes a "poison pill" amendment sponsored by Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) that would have far-reaching, negative consequences for nonprofit advocacy. The amendment contains outrageous language that restricts National Service fund recipients from using private funds for lobbying; endorsing or supporting events that endorse or oppose legislation; engaging in selected nonpartisan voter engagement activities; organizing or engaging in petitions, protests, boycotts, or strikes; providing or promoting abortions or referrals; or influencing union organizing.

Click here to tell your senators to oppose any attempt to include language like the Foxx amendment in S. 277.

Additionally, an organization cannot receive National Service funds under the Foxx amendment if it "co-locates" with an organization that engages in most of the listed activities. There is no definition of "co-located on the same premises," and this vagueness could ensnare organizations located in the same office building as the offending group, even if the organizations are not related or connected in any other way.

Finally, if an organization (or co-located organization) is indicted — not necessarily convicted — for voter fraud, it is ineligible for National Service programs. Given the recent history of politically motivated voter fraud prosecutions, this language is especially troubling.

The First Amendment protects against speech restrictions, such as those in the Foxx amendment. While the Foxx amendment appears to be unconstitutional, we cannot wait for lawsuits and court decisions to protect the rights of nonprofits and their constituents. We must act now!

Please contact your senators immediately and tell them to oppose any attempt to include language like the Foxx amendment in S. 277. Click here to send an e-mail to your senators (with a copy to the White House), or call you senators immediately (Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121).

The Senate is poised to move quickly on this legislation — action on the bill could occur early this week. Please act now!


>All Things Reform Mobile: allthingsreform.mofuse.mobi >Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 (not toll-free) >US House/Senate Mobile: bit.ly/members >Contact your reps tips: bit.ly/dear >Shortened All Things Reform URL: bit.ly/dw


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Monday, March 16, 2009

US agency ATSDR neglects many communities near toxic waste sites


Logo of the United States Agency for Toxic Sub...Image via Wikipedia

Government reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From:
OMB Watch



A federal agency responsible for studying and responding to adverse health effects caused by toxic waste is reticent to acknowledge patterns of illness near contaminated sites, according to a report released by the House Science Committee subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight.

cleanupThe Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) often paints a rosy picture of the health in communities near toxic waste sites, according to the report. In the process, scientific integrity has been sacrificed. An ATSDR staffer told the subcommittee, “It seems like the goal is to disprove the communities’ concerns rather than actually trying to prove exposures.”

ATSDR is a key agency in implementing Superfund, the national toxic waste clean-up program. While EPA handles environmental assessment and remediation, ATSDR works on the health side, assessing community health and studying the links between toxic exposure and illness.

The report outlines several examples in which ATSDR has failed to serve in the best interest of communities at risk. In most cases, ATSDR simply doesn’t acknowledge the severity of the situation. From the subcommittee’s report:

[T]ime and time again ATSDR appears to avoid clearly and directly confronting the most obvious toxic culprits that harm the health of local communities throughout the nation. Instead, they deny, delay, minimize, trivialize or ignore legitimate concerns and health considerations of local communities and well respected scientists and medical professionals.

For example, after asbestos contaminate debris began washing up on an Illinois beach, the Illinois Department of Public Health and ATSDR released a report in 2000 that concluded “no apparent public health hazard exists.” The debris continued to wash up for years, and when ATSDR revisited the issue (in 2007) it once again concluded the beaches were safe from asbestos, according to the subcommittee’s report.

But tests from 2006 showed that asbestos had made its way into the sand on the beach, leading a local EPA office to object to a draft version of ATSDR’s findings, according to the subcommittee’s report. However, the final version went unchanged.

The subcommittee released the report in advance of an oversight hearing scheduled for Thursday at 10am. Current ATSDR head Dr. Howard Frumkin, of whom the report is quite critical, is scheduled to testify.

Image by Flickr user cpkatie, used under a Creative Commons license.

Update: Opening statements and witness testimony from Thursday's hearing are now available on the hearing webpage.

(Matthew Madia 03/11/09)


+ + + + Related article + + + +


Government reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From: TreeHugger.com


by Brian Merchant, Brooklyn, New York on 03.11.09


us agency toxic substance dangerous photo

Photo via All Around the House


The Agency of Toxic Substances and Disease Registry has a number of responsibilities. One of which is to determine whether or not it's safe for people to live near toxic dump sites. And one of which is not to "deny, delay, minimize, trivialize or ignore legitimate health concerns," as a recent report has charged the agency with frequently doing. Through poor analysis, failure to act, and possibly a deliberate intent to obscure findings, the ATSDR has left many people exposed to toxic substances, and at great health risk.

Imagine living near a Superfund site, or a something that looks and smells suspiciously like a toxic waste dump. It stinks, and some of your neighbors seem to have trouble breathing--you're worried you might be exposed to toxic materials. The ATSDR is the agency you were supposed to contact. So you did. And the agency would give leave you with findings "that are challenged by outside scientists or are ambiguous about whether people living near industrial pollution or toxic dumps or breathe foul-smelling air have reason to worry." Then, you get mad. And rightfully so.

According to the new report on the ATSDR, which was obtained by the Associated Press:

"Time and time again ATSDR appears to avoid clearly and directly confronting the most obvious toxic culprits that harm the health of local communities throughout the nation," said the report from the House Science and Technology investigations and oversight subcommittee.

And how might it do that? Well, the AP article chronicles some pretty mind boggling incidents that include: the agency publicly rebuking a doctor who revealed that an area once home to a toxic waste company was causing a high incidence of a blood cancer in people exposed to it, "overlooking" previous studies that showed a history of cancer and birth defects in a contaminated neighborhood (and declaring it safe), and ignoring the complaints and health ailments of residents near an Ohio waste plant before using an insufficient sampling to declare the area non-toxic.

The list goes on—that was just a sort of greatest hits reel from yet another Bush administration environmental group's many acts of startling incompetence.

But now, with criticism getting heaped on the ATSDR from the new report, outraged communities, and some of the agency's own scientists, perhaps it'll finally have to fess up for its ignorance and really, reckless endangerment of human welfare.

More on Toxic Sites:
How Toxic is Your City?
Superfund365: Where Toxic Waste Meets Art
The Toxic Trailer Legacy



>All Things Reform Mobile: allthingsreform.mofuse.mobi >Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 (not toll-free) >US House/Senate Mobile: bit.ly/members >Contact your reps tips: bit.ly/dear >Shortened All Things Reform URL: bit.ly/dw


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Recovery information on government web sites so far meet with mixed results


Seal of the United States Office of Management...Image via Wikipedia

Government reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From:
OMB Watch

Recovery Transparency Meets Mixed Results


Three weeks after President Barack Obama signed into law the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), states have begun to see federal economic stimulus funds move within their borders. Behind the hundreds of billions of dollars soon to follow are some 25 federal departments, agencies, and administrations that are in charge of allocating the funds. In addition to this unprecedented level of emergency spending is a pledge by Obama to "watch the taxpayers' money with more rigor and transparency than ever." The speed at which the administration and some federal agencies have moved is impressive, even as there has been uneven implementation of transparency efforts.

Spending data on Recovery.gov, the new website established to monitor how the Recovery Act is being implemented, is organized haphazardly. To find information on Medicaid disbursements, for example, one must comb through a list of press releases to find a link to that spending. The Recovery.gov website links to the Recovery Act legislative text and contains a breakdown of the act's spending provisions by spending area (e.g. health, transportation, tax cuts, etc.), but the website does not – perhaps cannot yet, given the short time frame of its implementation – contain a listing of all federal Recovery Act programs with their attendant funding levels and state allocations. This fact, however, is mitigated by information provided by federal agency Recovery Act websites – a list of which is available on Recovery.gov.

When the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued guidelines to the federal agencies on Recovery Act spending, it mandated that they establish on their own websites a specific and easy-to-find area to detail Recovery Act spending. These Recovery Act sections of agency websites are all located by adding "/recovery" after the agency's web address. For example, the Department of Transportation's Recovery site is located at "www.dot.gov/recovery." The Recovery Act and subsequent instructions to create agency websites are only weeks old, but some agencies have moved adroitly and are providing organized, detailed information. Other agencies have not done so.

[...]

The level of transparency envisioned by the administration is ambitious, and with a law that is barely three weeks old, missteps and less than one hundred percent compliance is to be expected. Tracking Recovery Act spending at the program level, however, is only one challenge the Obama administration faces when it comes to spending accountability. As Recovery Act funds are disbursed to the states through contractors and subcontractors (and grantees and subgrantees), a sophisticated system of data reporting gathering will be required. In an effort to assist the administration in developing such a system, the Coalition for an Accountable Recovery (CAR), co-chaired by OMB Watch and Good Jobs First, has put forth its recommendations for a Recovery Act data collection and reporting system in a memorandum, "Interim Recovery.gov Data Reporting Architecture." It is certain that a series of iterations will be necessary to refine such a model to achieve the transparency articulated by the Obama administration, and as such, the CAR coalition will continue to solicit feedback from stakeholders and the administration to that end.

( 03/10/09)


>All Things Reform Mobile: allthingsreform.mofuse.mobi >Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 (not toll-free) >US House/Senate Mobile: bit.ly/members >Contact your reps tips: bit.ly/dear >Shortened All Things Reform URL: bit.ly/dw


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Two reports on the George W. Bush legacy and our regulatory system


Presidency of George W.Presidency of George W. Bush.

Government reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From:
OMB Watch


OMB Watch has released two reports looking back at the damage done to the regulatory system by the Bush Administration in the last eight years.

The Bush Legacy, crafted by freelance writer and author Osha Gray Davidson, shows that attacks on a variety of common-sense regulations over the past eight years have taken a great toll on the United States and uses clear examples to document a wide range of activities, much of which occurred behind the scenes, away from the eyes of all but the most observant members of the press and the public. The report a pointed assessment of the Bush administration's regulatory record and a call for the incoming Obama administration, the 111th Congress, and the American people to craft workable, effective solutions that will reinvigorate our struggling economy, safeguard our nation's natural beauty, and protect every American's health and safety.

After Midnight, co-authored by OMB Watch and Center for American Progress, dissects the varied impacts of problematic regulations that the Bush administration rushed out in its final months. Many of these "midnight" regulations actually represent deregulatory actions that weaken or eliminate safeguards protecting health, safety, the environment, and the public's general welfare. The Obama administration and new Congress are now faced with the question of how to respond to the Bush administration's midnight regulation, especially the difficult problem of Final rules. Executive branch agencies must conduct an entirely new rulemaking—the legal process by which regulations are made—which often consumes significant time and resources. Congress also can intervene to block or undo midnight regulation. The last option for dealing with midnight regulation is the courts; lawsuits are likely to challenge many of the Bush administration's midnight regulations.

As the Obama administration reverses Bush policies, it also must move forward with a positive regulatory agenda that recognizes a fundamental responsibility to protect the public's health, safety, and general welfare. This will require open and honest assessment of risks, vigorous monitoring and enforcement, and new regulatory protections where there are gaps or where existing protections are not strong enough.

The last eight years have left much work to be done, and OMB Watch will continue to work for a more just and democratic society, one in which an open, responsive government protects people’s health, safety, and well-being, safeguards the environment, honors the public’s right to information, values an engaged and effective citizenry, and adequately invests in the common good.


>All Things Reform Mobile: allthingsreform.mofuse.mobi >Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 (not toll-free) >US House/Senate Mobile: bit.ly/members >Contact your reps tips: bit.ly/dear >Shortened All Things Reform URL: bit.ly/dw


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Sunday, September 14, 2008

USAspending.gov database behind in providing the public information


Government reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From: NextGov

Senator questions progress on federal spending Web site
By Gautham Nagesh, gnagesh@govexec.com 09/11/08

A Web site launched last fall to track federal spending has not followed the law to provide up-to-date information on government contracts and grants, while a new bill would increase the amount of information agencies would have to post online.

The site, USAspending.gov, was launched in 2007 to fulfill one of the requirements of the 2006 Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, which requires the Office of Management and Budget to maintain a site listing organizations that receive more than $25,000 in federal funds.

Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Barack Obama, D-Ill., co-sponsored the funding accountability act, and when the bill was introduced, Obama said the spending site would be "an important milestone on the path to greater government transparency."

The law requires agencies to submit every 30 days a report listing the groups issued grants and the amount of the grant. USASpending.gov's data quality page shows, however, that some agencies, including the Homeland Security, Labor, Transportation and Veterans Affairs departments have not updated grant information since last year.

"OMB did a good job of getting the USAspending.gov Web site up and running, but now agencies must step up and fulfill their duties as required by law," Coburn wrote in an e-mail statement. "The agencies that are not posting information on each grant and contract awarded are violating the law. The American public deserves to know how their tax dollars are being spent."

In July, Robert Shea, then OMB's associate director for administration and government performance, attributed the lapse to glitches in the data provided to OMB, rather than a reluctance by agencies to submit the information. "I'm satisfied agencies are doing the best they can," said Shea, who stepped down from his OMB position on Sept. 2. "Everybody is making every effort to comply with the law. I'm proud of agency efforts to comply, and disappointed that we haven't been able to reflect that on USASpending."

Posting the grant data has proved problematic, Shea said, because, unlike contract data, grant data must be collected from various sources. Agencies are supposed to submit all grant awards to OMB by the 20th of each month, but he said, the data rarely comes in a format suitable for posting online and must be reformatted, which takes time. By contrast, OMB can pull data on contract awards directly from the federal procurement system in a format suitable for immediate posting.

The delays are caused by OMB bypassing current data reporting systems so it can post the grant data quickly, said Adam Hughes, director of federal fiscal policy at OMB Watch. The group's site, FederalSpending.org, downloads grant data collected and published by the Census Bureau. OMB attempts to obtain the data directly from agencies rather than wait for it to be published by Census.

"There hasn't been a robust reporting system for noncontract awards data," Hughes said. "That's what [Shea] is trying to improve on."

Hughes added that his organization has not been critical of OMB because the agency has demonstrated consistent progress in overcoming the challenges the site faces.

OMB also faces a federal funding accountability act deadline to begin posting subgrant and subcontract data on the site by Jan. 1, 2009. That includes grants and contracts awarded by federal agencies to state and local agencies, which then award that money to other groups. Shea said the challenge to meet the deadline is "enormous."

"There's a provision in the law for an extension for some of those [requirements] for another 18 months," he said. "I expect we'll exercise that extension. ... We have to figure out how to get as much of that data as we can as soon as possible."

Hughes said the difficulty in meeting the deadline to post subgrant and subcontract data was no surprise. "We knew when the first law was passed that the subaward reporting would be very difficult. I think that's being realized currently," he said. "That doesn't mean you shouldn't do it, but I think the timelines are a little unrealistic."

The problems with posting data on the site may be compounded by another bill sponsored by Coburn, Obama and Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Tom Carper, D-Del. The 2008 Strengthening Transparency and Accountability in Federal Spending Act, introduced on June 3, expands the requirements of the spending Web site.

The bill, which has been referred to the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, would require agencies to submit requests for proposals and contract information for posting on USASpending.gov to the site, allowing citizens to compare what the government asked for to what it purchased. In addition the bill would require the site to publish performance data on the contract and disclose additional information on the entities that receive federal awards.

"We're hoping the reaction to the new bill won't be 'It's too hard, we shouldn't do it,' " Hughes said. "We're hoping for a dialogue on how we can get this to work. We think this information is valuable and important." OMB Watch helped write both bills.

The bill also would require the site to provide better search capability and to offer data in a machine readable format such as XML. In addition, the bill requires agencies to certify that the entities receiving awards do not owe taxes.

Shea said he hopes OMB publishes the data in a way that allows the public to better track spending and determine if agencies could have spent the money better. "The purpose of sunlight is to cure wrong, and I just don't think the information is being used for that purpose yet," he said.

Asked if the site's visitors could track if agencies were spending money wisely, he replied, "I don't see that happening."

[Comments on this article]


. >All Things Reform Mobile: allthingsreform.mofuse.mobi >Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 (not toll-free) >US House/Senate Mobile: bit.ly/members >Contact your reps tips: bit.ly/dear .

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Thursday, February 28, 2008

House Appropriations Chair Rep. David Obey warns President Bush to negotiate or else

From OMB Watch:

QUOTATION OF THE DAY:

If [President Bush] chooses, as he did last year, to say 'sorry, I'm not going to compromise on the numbers,' then there's very little incentive for this committee to do anything except say, 'well, the president's dealt himself out of the game and we will simply have to … wait until a new president is in office who will act like an adult when it comes to negotiating.

-- House Appropriations Chair Rep. David Obey