Open Government

WPC's Center for Government Reform's mission is to partner with stakeholders and citizens to work toward a government focused on its core functions while improving its transparency, accountability, performance, and effectiveness for taxpayers.

Open Government Blog

Sneak peak at supplemental budget

July 2, 2009 in Blog

Although the new fiscal year and biennium are only 1 day old, it's not too early to start thinking about next year's supplemental budget. Based on yesterday's caseload forecast, the Governor is already hinting at what agencies can expect to be proposed.

Here are details on the caseload forecast as reported in The Olympian:

"More Washington residents will receive Medicaid and children’s health assistance in the next two years than earlier forecast, creating a $250 million shortfall in the state’s already-strained budget.

The new forecast was released Wednesday by the Caseload Forecast Council, and Gov. Chris Gregoire’s budget office released an analysis showing that $113.4 million of the expected increase is in aid to needy families that qualify for Medicaid.

An additional $69.6 million!
is for children’s health care, including some children whose families qualify for Medicaid and others whose citizenship has not been verified. General Assistance Unemployed costs also are up $12 million, and nursing-home costs are up by $6 million."

Coupled with last month's poor revenue forecast, the state's new budget is already projected to be in the red. In response, the Governor's budget office (OFM) sent a memo to agency directors yesterday detailing her strategy:

"On June 18, the Governor directed the following administrative actions by cabinet agencies:
  • Full Time Equivalent (FTE) reductions equivalent to a 2 percent reduction in 2009-11 budgeted GFS FTEs.
  • Continuation of specific GFS savings in out-of-state travel and training, personal services contracts, and equipment purchases.
  • Spending restricted to only critically necessary activities.

She also has encouraged non-Cabinet agencies to impose similar measures.

The Governor’s reductions are intended to create savings that mitigate the effect of the June revenue drop. OFM will continue to watch revenue collections and caseload/enrollment projections as we approach the September and November forecast updates for GFS revenues. Ongoing expenditure and revenue pressures will very likely require further action, including revisions in a 2010 supplemental budget. The reductions in this memo represent the first steps toward supplemental budget changes for expenditures funded by the GFS."

Included in the memo are two tables showing the projected FTE and spending reductions. These figures are a good first look at what the Governor may propose in a supplemental budget.

If enacted by agencies, the Governor's proposal would reduce FTEs below budgeted numbers by approximately 642 and spending by $374 million.

While this is a good first step, additional spending corrections by the Legislature next session will be necessary to rebuild the state's rainy day account. Otherwise we may not be able to respond effectively to any future curve balls the struggling economy may throw our way.

The convergence of technology and democracy

July 1, 2009 in Blog

There's no doubt that 2008 was an evolutionary leap forward in the use, and focus on, technology as a main driver of civic involvement in the democratic process. Then-candidate-Obama's masterful use of social networking for both messaging and fundraising took the nation, and the electorate, by storm. By comparison, the Republicans ramped up their focus on technology trends as well, but let's face it, the Democrats fired on all cylinders in this area.

Will lawmakers pledge to read healthcare bill before voting?

June 30, 2009 in Blog

2009 may go down in history as one of the most ambitious policy years in history. First there was the 1,073 page federal "stimulus" bill passed by Congress in February. Then last Friday the House passed the 1,200 page cap-and-trade bill. Next up is the restructuring of the nation's health care sector with current proposals totaling hundreds of pages.

Congress is considering these massive proposals under the direction of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who promised in 2006 to "create the most open and honest government in history," if given power. In fact, she went a step further and said, "Lawmakers must have the opportunity to read every bill before they vote on it. It’s common sense."

With Pelosi running the House, it's safe to assume lawmakers were provided time to read these policy tomes line-by-line before adoption, right?


th bills were voted on within hours of the final versions being made available. 

Hoping to change this, one citizen group is asking lawmakers to sign a pledge to read and post online for 72 hours the health care bill before voting. As reported by Politico:

. . . Let Freedom Ring, a group that promotes constitutional government and traditional values, has launched a campaign to get all 535 lawmakers in the House and Senate to pledge to not vote on the health care bill (likely to top 1,000 pages) until they have personally read it and the bill has been posted on the Internet for 72 hours.

“People were shaken into a new state of awareness when people talked about the size of the stimulus bill and the fact that, in all probability, no member of Congress or senator had read the bill,” said Colin A. Hanna, president of Let !
Freedom Ring. “That struck people as inherently absurd, almo!
st in the existential, theater-of-the-absurd sense. We all know lots of bills are not read, but sometimes the scope and nature of a bill rises to a different level than everyday legislation.”

The full text of the pledge reads:

I pledge to my constituents and to the American people that I will not vote to enact any healthcare reform package that:
1) I have not read, personally, in its entirety; and,

2) Has not been available, in its entirety, to the American people on the Internet for at least 72 hours, so that they can read it too.

Simple enough. Read the law you are proposing and allow voters the time to read it as well. Seeing how this is supposed to be the most transparent Congress in history, no doubt Pelosi is encouraging lawmakers to sign this ple!
dge, right?

Additional Information
Lawmakers to arm wrestle Speaker to see copy of cap-and-trade bill before vote

Lawmakers to arm wrestle Speaker to see copy of cap-and-trade bill before vote

June 26, 2009 in Blog

Ok, so the arm wrestling comment was an exaggeration but according to Politico only one copy of the cap-and-trade bill was available on the floor of the House today:

“Republicans say Democrats are ramming their climate-change legislation through the House without enough time for members to read the bill — let alone to understand it — all in violation of their promises about creating a more transparent legislative process.

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), running the debate for his party, asked repeatedly Friday afternoon if there was even a copy of the current version of the bill anywhere in the House chamber. Democratic Rep. Ellen Tauscher – sitting in the speaker’s chair although she’s already been confirmed as Obama’s undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security — repeatedly dod!
ged the question.

Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), one of the bill’s sponsors, finally rose to say that a single copy of the current version of the bill was available at the speaker’s desk and on the Internet, which members would have to leave the floor to access.”

I know democracy can be messy but this is ridiculous. Is it asking too much for members of the House to take the time to at least read and understand this 1,200 page bill before voting?

Additional Information
ReadTheBill FAIL: Cap and Trade Edition
Web voters support 72 hour budget timeout
WPC response to Governor's letter!
on cap-and-trade

Federal Transportation budget going broke....again

June 25, 2009 in Blog

From AASHTO....

On June 24th Deputy Secretary of Transportation John D. Porcari sent a
letter to the chief executive officers of every state department of
transportation in the country advising them of an impending cash shortfall in
the Highway Trust Fund (HTF). The HTF is the federal funding source for
thousands of state highway projects, which support hundreds of thousands of
jobs, across the country.

The Deputy Secretary's letter put all state DOTs on notice, warning that
instead of sending states overnight reimbursements for transportation
investments, the Federal Highway Administration could begin to ration state
repayments; possibly shifting to weekly or bi-weekly payments in the event that
state reimbursement requests exceed the cash available in the Highway Trust Fund.

Faced with the same crisis ten months ago, Congress transferred resources
from the general fund back into the HTF to prevent a shutdown of the Federal
Highway Program.

Using general fund dollars for the HTF can be dangerous at the federal level. Once the subsidy from the general fund reaches a certain amount, it triggers a provision that forces all future allocations to become subject to the regular budget process. This means transportation funding will have to compete with every other federal program, like defense and health care.

King County's sci-fi construction projects: Hulk, Jabba, Kahn and Kirk

June 25, 2009 in Blog

Earlier this week the State Auditor's Office released an accountability audit on King County's compliance with state laws and regulations and its own policies and procedures. The results weren't pretty.

According to the audit:

"Our audit found County officials should improve oversight and safeguards over its cash receipts, expenditures and assets. In many instances, oversight and safeguards were impaired by a lack of sufficient monitoring to ensure policies are complete, followed and staff is adequately trained to operate within those policies.

Further, County officials do not consistently provide or enforce performance measures or expectations in holding staff accountable. As a result, the County exposes itself to greater risk of loss, less ability to control expendi!
tures, and increases the risk for non-compliance with laws, regulations and contractual requirements. Consequently, our audit identified 12 findings."

The Auditor also attempted to conduct a performance audit of the County's construction management practices but terminated the audit "because the County was unable to provide complete and timely access to files and records related to construction projects" that the auditors requested.

Though a long list of problems was identified, perhaps the most curious finding of the audit concerned the County's management of construction records. From the audit (emphasis added):

"For the files we could access, we observed one file group where the naming conventions did not reflect what project or projects the file contained. The files observed were named after popular science fiction characters. >

County personnel stated the County does not have !
standard procedures for naming, organizing and storing electronic records and does not have protocols for file protection or shared drive access and permissions.

Instead, individual project managers are permitted to name their files whatever they want, organize them however they want and establish whatever restrictions to access they want."

So what sci-fi projects was King County engaged in?

In response to an email inquiry the Auditor's office said the files referenced above were named: Hulk, Jabba, Kahn and Kirk.

Though the County may escape the Wrath of Kahn, the wrath of voters is another story. In light of this audit you may start hearing them channeling the Hulk: "D!
on't make me angry, you wouldn't like me when I'm angry."

Blank width="0" />

Some sensible tax reform in Seattle?

June 23, 2009 in Blog

Seattle Today's Seattle Times reports that Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels, along with City Councilmen Tim Burgess and Richard Conlin, are going to work towards abolishing the $25 per employee "head tax" within Seattle city limits.

While I and WPC mainly focus on state-based policy, with my work in the small business community I feel safe asserting that this "head tax" was one of the worst business tax policies I have ever seen. The level of frust!
ration and outrage from small business owners regarding this tax was just about the same as, if not stronger than, their dislike of the state's Business and Occupation tax.

Really, the head tax was a punitive response against employers for the "privilege" of hiring employees within city limits. The reason? Because these employees commuted from outside the tax's jurisdiction, therefore employers are responsible for the damage done by their employees' commutes to the local environment. This is why exemptions were in place for employees who walked, rode the bus, carpooled or biked to work.

It's good to see policymakers in the Emerald City realize the tax made Seattle that much less competitive. Now, if the city would just come to its senses on the "square foot!
age tax."

Unemployment Trust Fund Draining Faster than Anticipated

June 23, 2009 in Blog

This past legislative session, the legislature passed HB1906 which temporarily increases the amount of unemployment insurance (UI) checks by $45 as well as raised the minimum insurance benefit amounts by drawing down the state's health UI trust fund. The $45 is temporary, however, and only extends to the end of the year. At first this was part of the Governor's plan to help stimulate the economy. As I pointed out, however, raising unemployment insurance benefits doesn't fall under the category of economic stimulus. It's just increasing government benefits.

That being said, I was less concerned about this legislation because our state's UI trust fund was over $4 billion at the beginning of the year (which has since declined to about $3.7 billion). This means the state has about 18 months worth of benefits available in the trust fund. This is 50% more than the Department of Labor recommends (12 months).

The original fiscal notes on HB 1906 calculated the draw-down rate at 7.5% unemployment, but Washington's unemployment rate has not been below 7.5% since December 2008. Therefore, the state is drawing down from the UI trust fund faster than anticipated.

According to the Employment Security Department, the March forecast shows a 24% bump in the cost of the temporary!
. The Department uses these forecasts to guesstima!
te costs and November's forecast showed a $187 million cost for the $45 temporary increase in UI benefits (through 2011) but now that has been updated to $231 million. Again, this is off of the March forecast, so the June forecast released last week will most likely increase these costs. ESD won't have that information available for a few weeks.

True, a $231 million hit to a reserve fund of $3.7 billion is not a huge amount. But the latest ESD Economic Update also contains information that based off of this year's 1906 and 5963 legislation, the trust fund could dip as low as 11.7 months by calendar year 2011 -- or $2.4 billion. This would put the tru!
st fund below the DOL recommended levels.

Why is this a concern? Because unforeseen expenses can lead to tax increases. And since employers pay 100% of UI premiums do we really want to make the cost of labor even more expensive?

Baird tries again for budget transparency

June 19, 2009 in Blog

Washington Congressman Brian Baird (D) once again introduced a resolution this week calling for a 72 hour review period on legislation. Baird's House Resolution 554 is co-sponsored by Rep. John Culberson of Texas (R). Here is the full text of the proposal as introduced on June 17:


Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to
require that legislation and conference reports be available on the
Internet for 72 hours before consideration by the House, and for other


    The purpose of this resolution is to:

      (1) Modernize the operations of the House of
      Representatives using information technology that has transformed and
      increased the efficiency of many aspects of American society such as
      financial services and markets, transportation, manufacturing,
      agriculture, and commerce with consumers and businesses.

      (2) Slow the explosive growth of the
      $11,000,000,000,000 national debt of the United States, reduce
      excessive annual budget deficits, and control the size and scope of
      government by ensuring that there is adequate scrutiny of proposals for
      new and amended laws, taxes, and expenditures.

      (3) Enhance public participation in American democracy
      and improve the quality of proposed legislation by allowing the
      opportunity for its review by State and local government officials,
      small business owners, large business leaders, journalists, scientists,
      academics, labor leaders, nonprofit organization leaders, authors of
      weblogs, and interested citizens.

      (4) Help restore public trust in government and enhance
      respect for the House of Representatives and the Congress by ensuring
      that their operations are conducted with the openness, order, and
      dignity befitting the world's oldest democracy.


    (a) Clause 4 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives is amended--

      (1) in its side heading, by inserting `legislation and' before `reports';

      (2) in paragraph (a) by striking subparagraph (1) and inserting the following new subparagraph:

    `(1) Except as specified in subparagraph (2), it shall not
    be in order to consider in the House a measure or matter until 72 hours
    (excluding Saturdays, Sundays and holidays except when the House is in
    session on such a day) after the text of such measure or matter (and,
    if the measure or matter is reported, the text of all accompanying
    reports) have been made available to Members, Delegates, the Resident
    Commissioner, and the general public pursuant to subparagraph (3).';

      (3) by adding at the end of paragraph (a) the following new subparagraph:

    `(3) Without further amendment before floor consideration,
    the full text of the measure or matter and each committee report
    thereon shall be posted continuously by means of the Internet in such a
    manner that they are conveniently accessible using existing technology,
    anonymously and at no cost, in a format that is searchable by text.';

      (4) in paragraph (c), by striking `the third calendar
      day' and inserting `at least 72 hours' and by striking `on' and
      inserting `after'.

    (b) Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives is further amended--

      (1) in clause 5(b), by striking `and the Resident
      Commissioner' and inserting `the Resident Commissioner, and the general
      public'; and

      (2) in clause 6(c), by striking `or' at the end of
      subparagraph (1), by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (2)
      and inserting `; or', and by inserting before the period `a rule or
      order proposing a waiver of clause 4(a) of rule XIII or of clause 8(a)
      or 8(b) of rule XXII, unless a question of consideration of the rule is
      adopted by a vote of two-thirds of the Members voting, a quorum being


    Clause 8 of rule XXII of the Rules of the House of Representatives is amended--

      (1) by striking subparagraph (a) and inserting the following new paragraph:

    `(a)(1) It shall not be in order to consider a conference
    report until 72 hours (excluding Saturdays, Sundays and holidays except
    when the House is in session on such a day) after the conference report
    and the accompanying joint explanatory statement have been available to
    Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, and the general public
    pursuant to subparagraph (2).

    `(2) Without further amendment before floor consideration,
    the full texts of the conference report and the accompanying signed
    joint explanatory statement shall be posted continuously by means of
    the Internet in such a manner that they are conveniently accessible
    using existing technology, anonymously and at no cost, in a format that
    can be searched by text.';

      (2) in paragraph (b), by striking subparagraphs (1) and (2) and inserting the following new subparagraphs:

    `(1) It shall not be in order to consider a motion to
    dispose of a Senate amendment reported in disagreement by a conference
    committee until at least 72 hours (excluding Saturdays, Sundays and
    holidays except when the House is in session on such a day) after the
    report in disagreement and any accompanying statement have been
    available to Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, and the
    general public pursuant to subparagraph (2).

    `(2) Without further amendment before floor consideration,
    the full texts of a Senate amendment reported in disagreement and any
    accompanying statement shall be posted continuously by means of the
    Internet in such a manner that they are conveniently accessible using
    existing technology, anonymously and at no cost, in a format that can
    be searched by text.'.


    Nothing in this resolution or any amendment made by it
    shall be interpreted to require or permit the declassification or
    posting on the Internet of classified information in the custody of the
    House of Representatives. Such classified information shall be made
    available to Members in a timely manner as appropriate under existing
    laws and rules.


    It is the sense of the House that, with the objective of
    preventing circumvention of clause 4(a) of rule XIII of the Rules of
    the House of Representatives that the Committee on Rules should develop
    standardized policies and procedures to require that proposed
    amendments (except those offered under an open rule) that are major in
    size, scope, or cost be posted on the Internet for an appropriate
    number of hours.

Additional Information
Web voters support 72 hour budget timeout

The tale of two Washingtons

June 18, 2009 in Blog

Perhaps one of the things most taken for granted about today's state revenue forecast is the fact that no one is fighting over the numbers. When the state's nonpartisan revenue forecast committee issues its projections you don't see dueling press releases from partisans claiming that the numbers are wrong and the state should instead base its projections on the source of a political party's choosing.

Unfortunately the same can't be said about the debate occurring in Washington D.C. concerning the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) projection on the cost of the health care reforms being considered. As noted by The Hill:

"Democratic leaders are growing frustrated with Senate Republicans and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) for clouding prospects for timely passage of the healthcare overhaul by way of their critiques . . .

Democratic leaders have also grumbled about the CBO, which released an analysis Monday that may result in Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) delaying action on his panel. CBO has reportedly scored the Finance Committee’s proposals at $1.6 trillion, forcing Baucus to chop the package by $600 billion . . .

Growing frustrations with CBO have spurred some Democrats to consider shelving cost estimates from the agency and using projections from another source, such as the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which is part of the Obama administration . . .

Peter Orszag, the director of Office of Management and Budget, however, has downplayed the possibility of using projections from his agency instea!
d of CBO.

'CBO scoring is going to be used in t!
his process,' Orszag said late Wednesday."

The whole point of nonpartisan forecasts is to help remove politics from the process and provide accurate information to the public and lawmakers. If those numbers get in the way of speedy action and instead force more thoughtful debate, the only losers are politicians --- not the taxpayers they serve.

Here are additional details on the CBO cost projections.