The Transparency Revolution Skips Connecticut

March 26, 2009

Connecticut’s elites preen themselves on their state’s reputation for open and accountable government.

The Freedom of Information Commission, State Elections Enforcement Commission, and State Ethics Commission were created in the aftermath of Watergate. In 2005, campaign-finance “reformers” seized on the Rowland scandal to win passage of “public” financing of legislative and constitutional-officer elections. Last year, Rowland’s successor signed a package of additional measures she said permitted Connecticut to “proudly and rightfully lay claim to the toughest ethics laws in the country.”

So why is Connecticut AWOL from the spending-transparency revolution that’s sweeping state and local governments?

There’s an ugly answer to that question, but first, some background.

The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, a measure shepherded through Congress in 2006 by Barack Obama and Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), created a website with detailed data about the companies, unions, state/local government agencies, and nonprofit organizations that receive federal contracts, grants, and loans.

The idea quickly spread to the next level of government, with “red” states -- take note, Common Causers -- leading the way. Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas were early adopters. The Lone Star State’s efforts were particularly impressive, reports Sandra Fabry of Americans for Tax Reform’s Center for Fiscal Accountability: “In the fall of 2006 [Governor Rick Perry] began posting his own office’s quarterly expenditures online, and in early 2007 made transparency in government spending one of the planks of his Four Point Budget Reform Plan. The state’s Comptroller Susan Combs gradually rolled out and populated an online database for Texas government expenditures -- implementing the letter of the legislation passed by the Legislature even before the ink was dry.”

Last year, over a dozen states created “Google Government” portals. Governor Sarah Palin began to put data from Alaska’s accounting system online. Legislators in the Peach State enacted Open Georgia, “a gateway for obtaining information and key documents about how the State of Georgia spends tax dollars and other revenues.” Governor Bobby Jindal and state lawmakers launched Louisiana Transparency and Accountability, an effort to present “key … finances and operations in a clear and concise format designed for ease of public use.” The Silver State’s governor created the Nevada Open Government Initiative through an executive order. Governor Mark Sanford used the same tool to establish South Carolina’s spending-transparency website.

Progress has continued in 2009. A bipartisan coalition of lawmakers introduced a bill to establish the “Open Books Oregon Project.” The Rhode Island Department of Administration joined an effort by the state treasurer to display spending records “in a detailed, user-friendly format … with a few easy clicks.” And Republican lawmakers in West Virginia introduced a bill to require the state auditor to work with the legislature’s auditor and the governor toward establishing an expenditure database.

With so many states on board, show-me-the-spending activists have turned their attention to local government. In North Dakota, when pols and bureaucrats whined that it was too costly to post government-school expenses online, a free-market think tank completed the project in six months, at a cost of $35,000. A Kansas lawmaker is trying to expand his state’s transparency law to include school districts. In Colorado, Weld County, as well as the cities of Greeley and Fort Collins, have put their check registers online.

For the last few years, State Rep. William Hamzy has assumed the Sisyphean task of fighting for spending transparency in Connecticut. His attempt this session, H.B. No. 5954, would “require the Department of Information Technology to establish a web site, accessible to the general public, that will list state grants, contracts, projects and loans.”

Good idea -- and long overdue, right? Er … this is Connecticut. H.B. No. 5954 has no co-sponsors, and the Government Administration and Elections Committee hasn’t even taken testimony on the proposal, much less voted on it. The Connecticut Foundation for Open Government, a collection of mainstream-media types, lawyers, and academics, has nothing to say about Hamzy’s bill. Also taking a pass: Connecticut Common Cause and the Ralph Nader-created Connecticut Citizen Action Group.

The inescapable truth is that drilling deeply into how the state and its municipalities annually spend tens of billions of taxpayer dollars isn’t of much interest to Connecticut’s advocates for “good government.” Their “solutions” to public-sector corruption and secrecy involve raising greater amounts of revenue, hiring more bureaucrats, and further restricting individual participation in the policy and political processes.

In the blinding light of the digital-driven transparency revolution, it’s clear that the Nutmeg State’s freedom-of-information phonies have surrendered whatever credibility they once had on the issue of government openness.

D. Dowd Muska is a writer, commentator and lecturer. His website is www.dowdmuska.com.

# # # # #