Making Government Transparent and Accountable
The Sunlight Foundation uses cutting-edge technology and ideas to make government transparent and accountable. Underlying all of our efforts is a fundamental belief that increased transparency will improve the public's confidence in government
The Sunlight Foundation Blog
-
Secret Hold on Bailout Oversight Lifted
According to POGO and TPM Muckraker, the hold on the nomination of Neil Barofsky to head the bailout oversight office has been released. Still no word on whether the senator who placed the hold was Sen. Jim Bunning. Kagro X, at Congress Matters, speculates as to whether the disclosure rules for holds forced the offending senator’s hand.
-
More On The Bailout Oversight Hold
TPM Muckraker has been all over the hold placed on the nomination of Neil Barofsky to lead the oversight of the bailout. All signs point to the initial suspect, Sen. Jim Bunning. If Bunning stays shut like a bad clam, the identity will have to come out in a few days anyways. In replying to my post from two days ago, Kagro X writes at Congress Matters:
I actually count three session days since Chairman Dodd’s November 21st statement noting the hold — pro forma sessions on the 24th, 26th and 29th. The calendar at Majority Leader Reid’s site lists a pro forma session for yesterday, December 2nd, with another scheduled for Friday, plus a working session on Monday. That’d take us to six session days since Dodd’s acknowledgment of the hold, which may or may not have been in place for a few days prior to the Dodd statement.
So in all likelihood, next week will see us pass the necessary sixth session day required under the new rule, and we’ll know who the chowderhead behind this delay is.
-
Hold Put On Bailout Oversight Office
According to TPM Muckraker, a Senate Republican placed a secret hold on the nomination of Neil Barofsky to lead the office of special inspector for the bailout.
Earlier this month, the Bush administration nominated Neil Barofsky, a federal prosecutor, to be the Treasury Department’s special inspector general on the bailout program. That’s a crucial post, given the astronomical sums at issue, the broad authority that Treasury has been given to distribute them, the concerns that have been raised about possible conflicts of interest, and the general urgency of our efforts to prevent an economic collapse.
So you’d think Congress would be doing everything it could to get Barofsky confirmed right away. You’d be wrong.
Last week, Sen. Chris Dodd, the Connecticut Democrat who chairs the banking committee, issued a little-noticed statement saying that although the nomination “was cleared by members of the Senate Banking Committee, the leadership of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and all Democratic Senators,” it was “blocked on the floor by at least one Republican member.” (itals ours.)
We’ve had our fair share of experience with secret holds, having fought to reveal the identities of those secretly blocking the Coburn-Obama bill (FFATA) and the campaign finance e-filing bill (S. 223). The first thing of note is that secret holds were, for the most part, abolished during the 110th Congress. The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act mandated the disclosure of the identity of a senator secretly blocking a “measure or matter” “not later than 6 session days” after the initiation of the hold.
The Barofsky nomination provides a good example of the loopholes in this mandate of disclosure. If a bill or, in this case, a nomination comes up prior to a long recess, the disclosure of the offending senator’s identity will have to wait until the Senate reconvenes for at least 6 session days, not calendar days. So far, since the nomination was blocked, the Senate convened for two session days. While they are expected to convene tomorrow for a pro forma session, it is unknown whether the Senate will convene for four more days by the end of the year.
TPM Muckraker suspects Sen. Jim Bunning to be the secret hold senator, having opposed the full funding of the office that Barofsky is nominated to lead. If you can’t wait another four session days to find out who is blocking oversight of the $700 billion bailout, feel free to call your senator and ask. Leave your findings in the comments or head over to TPM Muckraker and let them know.
-
Ensign Amendment Actually a McConnell Amendment
On Monday, S. 223, the Senate electronic filing bill was blocked for a third time, this time by Sen. John Ensign who offered an amendment that would require outside organizations filing ethics complaints to disclose their funding sources. This non-germane amendment did not originate from Ensign’s offices.
Sunlight has learned that last week Democratic offices were given a Unanimous Consent agreement that would have allowed the Senate to move to S. 223 only if they agreed to take up a an amendment identical to the one introduced on Monday by Senator John Ensign. The consent agreement came from none other than the offices of Sen. Mitch McConnell, whom the Sunlight Foundation has targeted as a culprit in covering up the identity of the anonymous Senators previously blocking the bill. That the “McConnell amendment” is now being offered by Senator Ensign comes as no surprise to long time McConnell watchers, who are well aware that when it comes to reform, McConnell is often hiding behind the scenes, pulling all the strings. .
The document shows that the effort to block S. 223 originates not from the offices of Sen. Ensign but from the Minority Leader’s office. So, McConnell wasn’t hiding the identity of a fellow senator, he was hiding himself!
-
What’s McConnell Hiding?
Today, the Sunlight Foundation launched a new campaign to reveal which senator is blocking passage of the Senate Campaign Disparity Act (S. 223). If you’ve been following this story here you know that twice this bill – which would require senators to file their campaign finance reports electronically – has been blocked by an anonymous Republican senator who is being hidden by Sen. Mitch McConnell. In his home state of Kentucky we are launching a billboard and a Web site to force McConnell to reveal the name of the anonymous senator. The Louisville Courier-Journal and the Politico have already picked up the story. Check out What’s McConnell Hiding? for more details or continue reading below the fold. We have a number of ways for you to get involved.What’s McConnell Hiding? is a site based on action. You can call Mitch McConnell and ask him to release the names, you can write to an editorial board in Kentucky, you can take our poll to indicate your position on what McConnell should do, or you can participate in our contest. Our poll is equipped as a poll widget, which we encourage you to put on your blog, if you have one, so that your readers can vote in the poll as well.
So, you’ve heard about the poll and now you’re wondering about this contest. The first person to send us a video of McConnell responding to questions about who is blocking S. 223 will receive $500. That’s $500 if you can get McConnell on record responding to questions or refusing to respond about which senators are blocking S. 223. So break out those cameras and start recording.
This campaign is important to end the notion that our elected representatives can hide while they prevent no-brainer legislation from passing. It’s time to let Mitch McConnell know that this practice has got to stop now! No more secret government, no more delayed campaign finance information, and no more anonymous senators.
Let’s make Mitch McConnell reveal what he’s hiding! Go to whatsmitchmcconnellhiding.com and join the campaign to free S. 223 and begin to end secret government practices. We don’t need to wait to do it. We can do it now.
-
Sen. Jon Kyl: Afraid of Open Government
Sometimes senators admit that they are holding a particular piece of legislation. In this case, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) admitted that he is the one blocking passage of the OPEN Government Act, a FOIA improving bill cosponsored by Sens. Pat Leahy (D-VT) and John Cornyn (R-TX). Kyl states that the bill would require the Justice Department to release sensitive data related to law enforcement and that the "uncharacteristically strong" opposition to the bill from Justice is reason enough to block the bill. According to the AP, the Justice Department is concerned about "a section that would eliminate exemptions allowing the government to deny access to privileged or law-enforcement sensitive information." Sen. Leahy assailed the hold that Kyl is using to block the bill, "This is a good government bill that Democrats and Republicans alike can and should work together to enact. It should be passed without further delay." The same goes for the Senate Campaign Disparity Act (S. 223). If Kyl can fess up to holding an open government bill then Mitch McConnell can cough up the names of the anonymous senators blocking S. 223 from passing.
-
Sigh. Another Secret Hold.
What is it with bills that create more open and transparent government and secret holds? Last week, a Republican senator placed a secret hold on the OPEN Government Act, a bill that would expand and fill the holes in FOIA. OPEN is cosponsored by Senators Pat Leahy (D-VT) and John Cornyn (R-TX), who have pushed for greater FOIA rights for some time now. As soon as they get the ability to pass the bill someone in Cornyn's party blocks it. We know that the secret hold comes from a Republican because it came through the leadership. This is yet another instance of Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) hiding the identity of a secret holder. Josh at the Seminal has put together a list of senators to call and ask if they placed the secret hold. If you have a moment you should stop by and give your senator a call. Openthegovernment.org, Public Citizen, and the Federation of American Scientists have also put out a call to arms to unmask the secret holder. Do your part and make the call. If they can't end the practice of secret holds anytime soon than we may as well make the secrecy obsolete by unmasking the secret senator every single time.
-
Feinstein asks for McConnell’s help on S.223
On Monday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) asked Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) to help her pass S.223, the Senate campaign finance electronic filing bill. McConnell has been abetting a Republican objection to the bill by refusing to reveal information about who in his party does not approve of this no-brainer legislation. While McConnell states that Republican Senators want to offer amendments to the bill he also refuses to identify and describe these amendments. Feinstein is committed to passing this bill and McConnell has said that he supports it. McConnell must meet with Sen. Feinstein to work together to pass this bill without poison pill amendments. Feinstein’s letter asks for McConnell to identify to her the amendments that Republican Senators wish to offer. If they have the kind of support that S.223 has than they could be added. If they are controversial, they should go through the regular committee process. This is very simple and fair. Read the letter:
The Honorable Mitch McConnell
The Republican Leader
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Mitch:
I write to ask for your assistance in getting S. 223, the “Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act,” adopted by the Senate. I am willing and eager to work with you and our Senate colleagues to get this legislation passed.
As the Republican Leader and also a member of the Rules Committee, you are well aware of hurdles Senators Feingold and I have faced in having this bill brought up for consideration and passed on the Senate Floor.
To date, the Member or Members on your side who objected to taking up and adopting the bill have not come forward to say why the bill is being held up.
This is a simple, straight-forward bill that brings transparency to campaign report filing procedures. There is no public opposition. Most important, S. 223 has broad bipartisan support — currently, 38 of our colleagues have signed on as cosponsors, including 15 Republicans.
Your press spokesman has suggested that the bill was held up because some members of your party may wish to offer amendments. I am ready to meet with those Senators to discuss their amendments and try to address their concerns.
If they insist on remaining anonymous, I would ask you to identify those amendments yourself.
If those amendments, like this bill, have broad bipartisan support and no one opposes them on the merits, we may be able to reach agreement to have them considered.
If, on the other hand, they are controversial proposals and would threaten the ultimate enactment of this bill, I would ask that you allow the Rules Committee to consider them in the normal course and permit this bill to go through without amendment.
I look forward to working with you and my Senate colleagues to make S. 223 law.
With warm personal regards,
Dianne Feinstein
Chairman
-
Go Public With the Objection
The Winston-Salem Journal stands up for openness while Sen. Mitch McConnell and Republican Senators, including the two North Carolina Senators Elizabeth Dole and Richard Burr, continue to block S.223 from passing in a clean, amendment-free fashion. McConnell and a few Republican Senators want to amend the bill to prevent its passage. The Winston-Salem Journal write that the objecting Senator, or Senators, should go "public with his or her objections." What McConnell and his cohort need to understand is that objecting to a bill may be a Senate tradition, "But to do so anonymously is cowardly, and to do so while professing not to be the blocker is deceitful." Tell Mitch McConnell – (202) 224-2541 – to release the names of the objectors and to make any and all amendments available to the public now.
-
Senate Republicans Want to Offer Amendments to S.223
Three editorial boards let loose today on Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and the Senate Republican Caucus for blocking the "no-brainer" legislation to require Senator's to electronically file their campaign finance reports. The Lexington Herald-Leader wrote that the Republican block is "but another of those too-clever maneuvers that serve only to undermine public support for Congress." The Baltimore Sun excoriates the entire Senate for failing to pass this simple measure. But the real gem comes in Roll Call's editorial, wherein we learn that, "McConnell told Roll Call that 'a couple of people on my side want to offer an amendment'". If there was ever doubt that this was not an attempt to kill the bill with "poison pill" amendments it ought to have just slithered out of the room. If the Republicans want to have a debate why not make their amendments public and see if they can't reach a deal as Sen. Bennett did when he attempted to attach a controversial amendment to the bill. Call Mitch McConnell – (202) 224-2541 – and let him know you don't appreciate his delaying and blocking techniques. Tell him to release the names of the objecting Senators and to release the details of the amendments he wants to add. Use this comment form to tell us what he says.
