Elsewhere: Massachusetts Aims To Go From ‘F’ To ‘A’ On Budgeting, While New York Stays Stuck At C
Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:38:00
Say “state legislature” to a New Yorker, and they are likely to reply back reflexively: “Most dysfunctional in the nation.”
But we may not realize how good we have it.
On April 13, the U.S. Public Interest Research Group released a report rating each state on a variety of metrics related to its willingness to release government spending data and the ease with which the public is able to access that data. Massachusetts received a failing grade of “F.”
The message resonated. Just weeks after the report was released, both the Massachusetts House and Senate voted unanimously to pass a bill designed to increase government transparency. The bill creates a searchable budget database that will make checkbook-level spending details available to the public.
“With this bill, Massachusetts will go from an ‘F’ to a straight ‘A,’” said Massachusetts Rep. Jay Kaufman, chair of the Joint Committee on Revenue and a chief sponsor of the bill. “The website will increase constituent confidence and empower watchdog agencies to ensure that we’re doing a good job with taxpayer money.”
While efforts to increase government transparency are nothing new in Massachusetts, the push for a state budget website occurred primarily in the current legislative session.
“The Internet age has been upon us for quite some time, but the government is slow to embrace new technology,” said Pam Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause Massachusetts. An increased reliance on technology, a major push by advocacy groups and a budget crisis that shows no signs of subsiding combined to make the website a reality.
Notably, the website will include information on Massachusetts’ 42 quasi-public agencies, similar to New York’s public authorities, which perform vital government functions but whose $8.5 billion outlay are not typically represented in the budget. Obtaining spending information on these agencies is notoriously difficult, and many argue that they are not subjected to proper scrutiny as a result.
“We ought to have more transparency in those agencies,” said Kaufman, the Massachusetts legislator. “The website will enable us to close this loophole.”
A second measure included in the bill sought to increase transparency around certain programs that provide business tax credits. Because these credits are refundable or transferable, they essentially act as grants or earmarks. “The current budget crisis is driving folks to be more frugal with their dollars, and this is one area where the state is getting less revenue than it could be,” said Wilmot.
Lawmakers believe that increased transparency will enable them to better evaluate the merit of each tax credit.
The bill is currently in conference and will soon be sent to Gov. Deval Patrick for approval. If all goes according to plan, the website will go live in January 2011.
While New York already has a public website that tracks government spending and revenue, the state lacks detailed information regarding contracts, tax subsidies and economic development incentives. New York was classified as an “emerging state” in the USPIRG report and received a grade of “C.”
State Sen. Liz Krueger, chair of the Select Committee on Budget and Tax Reform and vice-chair of the Finance Committee, has introduced an ambitious package of budget legislation that aims to increase transparency. One bill will require cost-benefit analysis of all tax expenditures, which are not voted on by the Legislature.
“Every other dollar that the state collects or spends is voted on every year,” Krueger said. “But we never evaluate tax expenditures and they are never subject to formal review, even though they add up to billions in revenue we do not collect because of exceptions in the law. I believe that it is critical for good government and transparency to figure out who is not paying their taxes.”
Whether her budget package has enough support in the Senate to pass, though, is still up in the air. Krueger said that it depends on the final shape of the legislation, even though many Republicans have privately expressed support, for whatever that ends up being worth.
“But we’ve seen many bills this year that we’ve thought we’ve had bipartisan support on and then Republicans have blocked them on the floor in what they call a party-line vote—even when they’ve been co-sponsors,” she said. “I do not assume or presume that anything will get done.”
But we may not realize how good we have it.
On April 13, the U.S. Public Interest Research Group released a report rating each state on a variety of metrics related to its willingness to release government spending data and the ease with which the public is able to access that data. Massachusetts received a failing grade of “F.”
The message resonated. Just weeks after the report was released, both the Massachusetts House and Senate voted unanimously to pass a bill designed to increase government transparency. The bill creates a searchable budget database that will make checkbook-level spending details available to the public.
“With this bill, Massachusetts will go from an ‘F’ to a straight ‘A,’” said Massachusetts Rep. Jay Kaufman, chair of the Joint Committee on Revenue and a chief sponsor of the bill. “The website will increase constituent confidence and empower watchdog agencies to ensure that we’re doing a good job with taxpayer money.”
While efforts to increase government transparency are nothing new in Massachusetts, the push for a state budget website occurred primarily in the current legislative session.
“The Internet age has been upon us for quite some time, but the government is slow to embrace new technology,” said Pam Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause Massachusetts. An increased reliance on technology, a major push by advocacy groups and a budget crisis that shows no signs of subsiding combined to make the website a reality.
Notably, the website will include information on Massachusetts’ 42 quasi-public agencies, similar to New York’s public authorities, which perform vital government functions but whose $8.5 billion outlay are not typically represented in the budget. Obtaining spending information on these agencies is notoriously difficult, and many argue that they are not subjected to proper scrutiny as a result.
“We ought to have more transparency in those agencies,” said Kaufman, the Massachusetts legislator. “The website will enable us to close this loophole.”
A second measure included in the bill sought to increase transparency around certain programs that provide business tax credits. Because these credits are refundable or transferable, they essentially act as grants or earmarks. “The current budget crisis is driving folks to be more frugal with their dollars, and this is one area where the state is getting less revenue than it could be,” said Wilmot.
Lawmakers believe that increased transparency will enable them to better evaluate the merit of each tax credit.
The bill is currently in conference and will soon be sent to Gov. Deval Patrick for approval. If all goes according to plan, the website will go live in January 2011.
While New York already has a public website that tracks government spending and revenue, the state lacks detailed information regarding contracts, tax subsidies and economic development incentives. New York was classified as an “emerging state” in the USPIRG report and received a grade of “C.”
State Sen. Liz Krueger, chair of the Select Committee on Budget and Tax Reform and vice-chair of the Finance Committee, has introduced an ambitious package of budget legislation that aims to increase transparency. One bill will require cost-benefit analysis of all tax expenditures, which are not voted on by the Legislature.
“Every other dollar that the state collects or spends is voted on every year,” Krueger said. “But we never evaluate tax expenditures and they are never subject to formal review, even though they add up to billions in revenue we do not collect because of exceptions in the law. I believe that it is critical for good government and transparency to figure out who is not paying their taxes.”
Whether her budget package has enough support in the Senate to pass, though, is still up in the air. Krueger said that it depends on the final shape of the legislation, even though many Republicans have privately expressed support, for whatever that ends up being worth.
“But we’ve seen many bills this year that we’ve thought we’ve had bipartisan support on and then Republicans have blocked them on the floor in what they call a party-line vote—even when they’ve been co-sponsors,” she said. “I do not assume or presume that anything will get done.”
