Obama has made transparency a "touchstone" (his word) of his administration and promises to apply it to tracking stimulus spending. But more and more people are asking questions like, "Exactly what is it?" And, "How do you define it?"
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the ranking member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has some ideas. In a letter (here's the press release on the letter) he wrote to Earl Devaney, chair of the Recovery Act Transparency and Accountability Board, who is in charge of tracking the billions of dollars in stimulus spending, Issa makes this point:
"Full transparency requires attention to not just what is posted online, but also how the information is posted. Information about how the taxpayers' money is distributed must be disclosed in a structured, open, and searchable format," Issa wrote to Devaney. "Spending this massive sum of money in relatively short order presents the dangerous probability of waste, fraud, and abuse."
This is a huge issue: Exactly what information do you post for the public to access so that you meet the definition of transparency, and, maybe more important, how do you structure it so it makes sense? Context is everything. Data that is given the proper context -- such as providing a "compared to what" context for the numbers -- works better than basic "data dumps," through which the public has to sift through rubbish to find a gem of a stat.
What are your ideas for structuring the data so it shows meaningful results and stats so that it meets the accountability standard Obama has said is needed?
Hat tip: Tech Daily Dose
COMMENTS
The transparency topic is interesting providing the possibility of it being the next "buzz" word in government reform.
The billions in stimulus funding and other government interventions may mean a new level of real transparency and accountability that has not been a significant factor for most government agencies thus far.
Because of the unprecedented level of fiscal intervention and concern from the public on how this money will be spent, it may serve as a catalyst for the next and improved level of government transparency and performance results.
NIck Mandel 03/13/09 11:02 am ET
Use a spreadsheet format with titles describing what the money is being spent on. Then have links that expand on the titles to drill down to the particulars.
Beverly Brown 03/13/09 10:37 am ET
During the past 8 years the word "transparency" did not exist in politics. It resided only in "webster's " dictionary. President Obama has been very clear that he is working "for the people". He has shown this in all facets of his governance. Yet, many of the opposition party has pundits who always are screaming for more openness of government when George Bush gave none; they didn't seem to care what Mr. Bush did in causing the country to go in debt by trillions of dollars. No, they seem to lack courage then to speak out. I'll called them "hypocrites". They want to see this president fail so they can effect the next upcoming House/Senate seat count. They want more Republican opposition to stop this president from working: for the people, of the people, by the people. The republican minority do not like to see policies from Mr. Obama that begins from the "bottom" up. They like to see it "trickle" down. The nation have seen where this has led us: Recession/Early stages of Depression/Wall Street Financier's and Big Spending CEO's, hiding and stealing profits in Swiss Bank accounts; not caring about the American people because of "greed" and a Bush Administration that did not enforce the Guidelines to put these Institutions in Check. Where were the naysayers(Republicans) then?
Maurice 03/13/09 09:12 am ET