Issa Introduces ‘Revolutionary’ Bill To Make All Federal Spending Transparent
PJMedia has learned that today Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) will introduce a new government openness bill that could revolutionize the way Washington operates and force a new level of federal transparency. If implemented, with a single click of a mouse citizens will be able to access traceable, digital information about how their tax dollars are being spent.
Issa, who is the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, is expected today to introduce the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act, or DATA Act. In short, he is seeking to force the government to open up its accounting books to the public. The modernization effort is an unprecedented and ambitious effort.
The new legislation will force the federal government to modernize its digital operations and finally reveal to the public through a single electronic platform its internal spending and external grants, contracts, and loans. It could empower citizens and government watchdog groups to challenge federal spending on wasteful or worthless programs.
Federal spending has always been a mystery to the public and even to Congress. Washington spending is at an all-time high. The Obama administration’s current spending level is a $3.18 trillion for the 2011 fiscal year.
To track these sums, the U.S. government operates two major databases, “USASpending.gov” and “Recovery.gov.” They are regarded as cumbersome, incomplete, disorganized, and intentionally opaque. Tracking the money has been impossible even for Congress, which has oversight authority.
For decades a wide swath of private industry — including banking and exchange trading industries — has provided user-friendly data tracking capabilities. But to date the federal government does not provide accurate and traceable information about how it spends taxpayer dollars.
If enacted, the DATA Act would set up a single tracking agency. It would follow federal spending, including grants, contracts, loans, and agencies’ internal expenses on a single electronic platform. It will use consistent reporting standards and data identifiers, making the information accessible and easily understandable to the public.
I’ll be emailing my senators today–I suspect it will be way too scary for the majority of cockroaches to have the light shown so brightly into the dark corners of Washington for any chance of passing!
Mike you dont really think the democrats will ever let this see the light of day DO you//
Since this is so unwieldy, concentrate on one thing at a time. For example, I want to know where the money originates and where the money flows that gives cash to Fatah and Kenya and other places that have no business having American cash.
When did America turn into a charity or investor in countries that are worthless? Funding the rebuilding of Japan and Germany after the war is one thing but the crazy people we give money to should be seen more easily so we can attack it and stop it.
Every dollar that leaves the U.S.
Issa offers us “legislative theater” against a $7,000,000/minute government. His law does little to stop Congress from treating citizens like an open MASTERCARD.
Check out the 535Project at http://www.libertysoup.org …. for tools to INSIST on an end to unsustainable spending & borrowing.
With all due respect, knowing where the money goes is the first step in determining the extent to which our tax-dollars are being mis-spent. Step two is the action you advocate.
Anything that consumes time is a good thing at this point. If we consume a week passing this bill, that’s one less week until the debt ceiling runs out. Should we run into the debt ceiling, the cuts will happen automatically.
They can start with two obvious accounting transparencies:
1. The inflation index which does not include fuel or foodstuff.
2. Unemployment, which only includes new time unemployment applications.
Change those two masking techniques and we would have a different economic world view.
You are absolutely correct. The current inflation index or CPI with food and energy put back in is at 9.6%.
What I’d like to see is a a website that matches up earmark money to campaign money – a link drawn from a politician (the earmark) to a company or organization (the contribution). Anyone have a URL to something like that?
THAT would be an interesting read.
Can you say corruption?
Our politicians at the Federal level have used the coffers of this country for far too long to reward those who donate to the politicians’ campaigns. Who knows for sure how many billions of tax dollars have been given away for for a few millions of campaign contributions.
Most of our politicians are lawyers – and they well know the phrase ‘quid pro quo’ – trouble is those who receive the earmarks are getting a dollar for pennies contributed.
Why the hell have we let such a system go on for so long? And it is still going on.
Always more legislative theater nibbling around the edges of a $7,000,000+ per minute government.
We already know that a Congress that treats taxpayers like an open MASTERCARD will not readily DISCIPLINE themselves… The 535Project gives those of us who PAY a stepwise “enforceable” Pledge protocol to INSIST on spending cuts NOW & an end to unsustainable borrowing:
Check out the 535Project at http://www.libertysoup.org for “therapeutic politics”.
This will only be as good as the penalties for non-compliance. Excuses from the bureaucracy like “we forgot that” or “we didn’t know this was covered by the law” need to be called out in the law as “offenses” subject to termination and fines. I would also include an exception for national security, we have lots of black programs that don’t need to be spelled out on the internet. In those cases I would require an affirmative act by the President, not someone he delegated to decide.
That said, Congress already has oversight power, so it seems to me this is redundant.
Never pass! No genuine Democrat will support it, and too few Republicans will support it. Oh, they’ll have plenty of fancy reasons why not to support it, but the bill will pass only if God strikes a bunch of the sleazy bastards dead.
Tex Expatriate is correct. Moreover, even if it should pass, POTUS will veto it. Don’t want any pesky citizens looking into how their money is being squandered.
But if Rep. Issa wanted to introduce a truly revolutionary bill, he would require the Administration to abide by Article 1, Section 1 of the Congress. In particular he would require any change in regulations by the Executive to be presented to Congress as a bill to be debated and passed by Congress for the President’s signature.
This bill, if turned into law will not make one bit of difference.
The politicians do what they want when they want, Obamacare, GM, Gulf drilling, etc. . They will spend how the think it is best for them, with or without a transparency law.
A thumb in the eye of the American people.
Do we have enough FisCons in Congress to make this pass? Maybe we can get Pelosi “most honest and transparent government in history” behind it? Mmmm… Nah.
None of these good bills introduced in the House will ever become law, but they need to be put forward anyway. Make the Dems pigeonhole them or vote them down. All the taking of the House accomplished was to slam on the brakes. Highlight the problem for the voters. Pass good bill after good bill, and make the Dems vote against.
This is one of those really excellent no-brainers the public can truly understand. This is a winner. Pass this bill. Make the Dems fight it.
The only way to make Washington more transparent is to nuke it from space.
That’s the only way to be sure.
The new legislation will force the federal government to modernize its digital operations and finally reveal to the public through a single electronic platform its internal spending and external grants, contracts, and loans. It could empower citizens and government watchdog groups to challenge federal spending on wasteful or worthless programs.
Which is exactly why it will never pass, or that loopholes will be put into it so as to make it meaningless.
I suspect that if this were to become law, the cost of developing the new system would dwarf the cost of creating/operating the stimulus bill website. And it would create ANOTHER new agency. Can’t we just put an agency that already exists be in charge of the website? How about the GAO? It’s supposed to be their job to keep track of the money already. Hire a couple of kids from MIT to create and operate the website, let the GAO feed them the data. . . presto, an actual usable website that is not run by overpaid bureaucrats in a new agency.
Given the number of agencies that no one knows what they do or have outlived their useful lives, do we REALLY need another one?
Another agency dependent on Congress to supply their paychecks.
What could go wrong?
Yes we have at least 7 accounting offices that are obviously a waste of money, could they be cross trained.
“… a single tracking agency.”
I thought that was supposed to be Crazy Uncle Joe Biden in the White House attic …
d(^_^)b
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
“Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”
From his great job covering stimulus would you tell us where it went?
Crazy Uncle Joe doesn’t know where the Porkulus money went. That’s the joke. (Maybe I should look into integrating a laugh track audio element with my comments?)
d(^_^)b
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
“Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”
This is hilarious! I know…KNOW there are federal (feral?) and state government agencies that manage literally billions of dollars with Excel. I wonder if the Texas Water Development Board is still working that way? This sounds like a good idea but how are you going to train people to actually count the money? Simple things, like requiring a 1099-GOV for all disbursements to individuals, would do more and quicker. ALL agencies currently file 1099-MISC for their contractors so the computer software is already there. Do you think they could figure out how to have the forms printed with the “GOV” letters? Probably not. Too hard to track ‘income, redistributed’ when they require all ‘income’ to be tracked. We are such bozos.
And just how will this apply to the DoD and intelligence communities? Do we really want the world to be able to track this??
You mean it isn’t already. How did that happen.
Politics, politicians, what a surprise . The constituents who keep these people in office,in jobs in perpuity without accountants to “open the books”, didn’t want to know? As long as their bread-baskets are overflowing, who cares. Ain’t Democracy grand.
“Representatives of the People”, e.g. Pelosi and not elected but with the same and better perks Michele O. in their federally funded jaunts to Europe,etc. To act and be treated as royalty. To compete with SunKings and spouses: Kennedys et spouse,WJ Clinton et spouse and now BH Obama.
One thing to be said for the old Communist nations, their politicians had to watch their backs. NOT of course from the people. American politicians, except those declared evil personified – to a man Republican – by bien-pensant
“liberal/Democrat” political moralists in Media, Hollywood, universities and of course Washington, become honoured “statesmen” no matter how contemptuous in behaviours that spell de haut en bas attitudes towards the “citizens”.
Ain’t Democracy grand? Not a bit like old fashioned royal courts ?
The rest of the world know a lot more about our defense expenditures than we do. We’re buying half from them not american companies
Expect another round of mangy, rabid dog attacks on Issa. Mother Government is to be left alone, to grow ever more bloated, the better to harm the country and the citizens.
Yawn ! Government computer programs don’t work. What does at the federal level except the military, and that’s being cut back, the more to be spread around to the horde of insiders.
i’m liking this idea, it’s responsible.
It is a nice thought but they will not pass it.If they do it will never work for
the public to see. They tried to pass a bill to allow so much money to run for office which is more important than anything. So that they are not owned but
answer to the AMERICAN PUBLIC. They live in there own world once they are in
office.