Opinion: Shining some light on Pa. spending
May 03, 2009
OPINION
By Kevin Ferris
[Philadelphia] Inquirer Columnist
Harrisburg seems poised to make state government more accountable and transparent.
Yes, that's right. Harrisburg. Accountable. Transparent. All in one sentence.
This week, the state Senate is expected to vote on the Taxpayer Transparency Act, which would create a searchable Web site that would let Pennsylvanians track state expenses and contracts by June 1.
It couldn't come at a better time, as governments spend at unprecedented rates, despite the recession, and concerns are raised about the lack of oversight at the state and federal levels.
The bill, which had bipartisan support in committees, would make the following data available: who got the money; how much was spent; where the money came from; the purpose of an expense; the outcome, if available; and any applicable audits.
State Rep. Jim Christiana was seeking cosponsors for a similar measure in the House last week. (He had 83, including six Democrats, as of Wednesday.) Chuck Ardo, spokesman for Gov. Rendell, said: "It sounds like the right thing to do."
Indeed it is. About two dozen states - and the federal government - have set up databases that allow the public to oversee spending.
Some sites are created by executive order; North Carolina's is a recent example (www.ncopenbook.gov). Several are products of the legislature, such as Kansas' (www.kansas.gov/kanview) and Washington's (http://fiscal.wa.gov). In other states, including New York (www.openbooknewyork.com) and Nebraska (www.nebraskaspending.com), state treasurers or comptrollers took the initiative.
Missouri's site (http://mapyourtaxes.mo.gov) is an excellent example of how user-friendly and detailed these sites can be, down to the smallest bills and contracts. That highlights one flaw in the Pennsylvania bill, which would limit disclosure to expenses of $25,000 or more.
Erik Arneson, a spokesman for the Senate Republican caucus, said that was a starting threshold that could be eliminated once the site was up and running. Better to lose it now, before the bill becomes law, as other states have clearly shown it's unnecessary.
The cost of these Web sites is minimal, especially compared with the potential benefits. Arneson estimates expenses of $60,000 to $150,000 to start Harrisburg's. A few states accrued no extra costs, as they simply added the information to existing Web sites. Other states' start-up costs ranged from $5,000 (Minnesota) to $310,000 (Texas).
The benefits? Start with the peace of mind of knowing that many extra sets of eyes are monitoring the government's cash flow. They are much needed in Harrisburg and Washington.
Consider state Auditor Jack Wagner's recent warning to the U.S. Government Accountability Office about Pennsylvania's $9.4 billion share of federal stimulus spending. "We are extremely concerned about the potential for a lack of statewide government transparency and accountability in the use of these vitally important funds," Wagner wrote.
On a larger - and more troubling - scale, the inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) sounded an alarm April 21. Not only was the $700 billion program expanding, the inspector general's office warned, but the feds weren't able to make banks account for the money. The inspector general said: "Treasury has indicated, however, that it will not adopt . . . [the] recommendation that all TARP recipients be required to do the following: account for the use of TARP funds; set up internal controls to comply with such accounting; report periodically to Treasury on the results, with appropriate sworn certifications."
That's just TARP - not the $800 billion in stimulus spending and the $3.6 trillion in the budget passed last week.
Online checkbooks won't fix all government spending problems, but they're a start. And they can actually help save money.
Sandra Fabry, executive director of the Center for Fiscal Accountability in Washington, says Texas has reported millions in savings because of duplication and waste uncovered as a result of its Web site. In Kansas, lawmakers use their site's data to grill department heads about expenses and contracts. South Carolina, Fabry says, has so much information online that it is saving money by processing fewer public-records requests.
Christiana, a 25-year-old rookie Republican lawmaker from Beaver County, said that while campaigning last year, he kept hearing about Harrisburg's "abuse of taxpayer dollars." So, for him, the Web site is a no-brainer.
"There's no sound argument against this," he said.
And, if not for the voters, lawmakers can act out of self-interest. Better to have accountability and transparency connected with Harrisburg than the words too often associated with legislators and spending: investigation and indictment.
By Kevin Ferris
[Philadelphia] Inquirer Columnist
Harrisburg seems poised to make state government more accountable and transparent.
Yes, that's right. Harrisburg. Accountable. Transparent. All in one sentence.
This week, the state Senate is expected to vote on the Taxpayer Transparency Act, which would create a searchable Web site that would let Pennsylvanians track state expenses and contracts by June 1.
It couldn't come at a better time, as governments spend at unprecedented rates, despite the recession, and concerns are raised about the lack of oversight at the state and federal levels.
The bill, which had bipartisan support in committees, would make the following data available: who got the money; how much was spent; where the money came from; the purpose of an expense; the outcome, if available; and any applicable audits.
State Rep. Jim Christiana was seeking cosponsors for a similar measure in the House last week. (He had 83, including six Democrats, as of Wednesday.) Chuck Ardo, spokesman for Gov. Rendell, said: "It sounds like the right thing to do."
Indeed it is. About two dozen states - and the federal government - have set up databases that allow the public to oversee spending.
Some sites are created by executive order; North Carolina's is a recent example (www.ncopenbook.gov). Several are products of the legislature, such as Kansas' (www.kansas.gov/kanview) and Washington's (http://fiscal.wa.gov). In other states, including New York (www.openbooknewyork.com) and Nebraska (www.nebraskaspending.com), state treasurers or comptrollers took the initiative.
Missouri's site (http://mapyourtaxes.mo.gov) is an excellent example of how user-friendly and detailed these sites can be, down to the smallest bills and contracts. That highlights one flaw in the Pennsylvania bill, which would limit disclosure to expenses of $25,000 or more.
Erik Arneson, a spokesman for the Senate Republican caucus, said that was a starting threshold that could be eliminated once the site was up and running. Better to lose it now, before the bill becomes law, as other states have clearly shown it's unnecessary.
The cost of these Web sites is minimal, especially compared with the potential benefits. Arneson estimates expenses of $60,000 to $150,000 to start Harrisburg's. A few states accrued no extra costs, as they simply added the information to existing Web sites. Other states' start-up costs ranged from $5,000 (Minnesota) to $310,000 (Texas).
The benefits? Start with the peace of mind of knowing that many extra sets of eyes are monitoring the government's cash flow. They are much needed in Harrisburg and Washington.
Consider state Auditor Jack Wagner's recent warning to the U.S. Government Accountability Office about Pennsylvania's $9.4 billion share of federal stimulus spending. "We are extremely concerned about the potential for a lack of statewide government transparency and accountability in the use of these vitally important funds," Wagner wrote.
On a larger - and more troubling - scale, the inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) sounded an alarm April 21. Not only was the $700 billion program expanding, the inspector general's office warned, but the feds weren't able to make banks account for the money. The inspector general said: "Treasury has indicated, however, that it will not adopt . . . [the] recommendation that all TARP recipients be required to do the following: account for the use of TARP funds; set up internal controls to comply with such accounting; report periodically to Treasury on the results, with appropriate sworn certifications."
That's just TARP - not the $800 billion in stimulus spending and the $3.6 trillion in the budget passed last week.
Online checkbooks won't fix all government spending problems, but they're a start. And they can actually help save money.
Sandra Fabry, executive director of the Center for Fiscal Accountability in Washington, says Texas has reported millions in savings because of duplication and waste uncovered as a result of its Web site. In Kansas, lawmakers use their site's data to grill department heads about expenses and contracts. South Carolina, Fabry says, has so much information online that it is saving money by processing fewer public-records requests.
Christiana, a 25-year-old rookie Republican lawmaker from Beaver County, said that while campaigning last year, he kept hearing about Harrisburg's "abuse of taxpayer dollars." So, for him, the Web site is a no-brainer.
"There's no sound argument against this," he said.
And, if not for the voters, lawmakers can act out of self-interest. Better to have accountability and transparency connected with Harrisburg than the words too often associated with legislators and spending: investigation and indictment.
