Classified Budgets and Congressional Corruption
Rep. Jim Gibbons (R-Nevada) helped to direct millions of dollars of classified contracts to one of his major campaign contributors, according to an astonishing account in the Wall Street Journal. (“Congressman’s Favors for Friend Include Help in Secret Budget,” by John R. Wilke, Wall Street Journal, November 1, sub. req’d.).
Coming in the wake of the bribery scandal involving Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-CA), the latest report underscores the potential for corruption in classified defense and intelligence budgeting.
Yet Congressional leaders have stubbornly resisted efforts to reduce budget secrecy.
The Las Vegas Review-Journal followed up on this aspect of the Gibbons story in a report yesterday.
See “Experts critical of secret defense budgeting system” by Aaron Sadler, Las Vegas Review-Journal, November 2.
This report serves as a landscape assessment and toolbox from which local governments can negotiate an informed position when it comes to the levers available to them and includes a first-of-its kind analysis of eight executed community benefits agreements.
When a hurricane hits, it’s all hands on deck – that goes for federal data, too. Pulling back from our investments in timely, accurate, and accessible public data will only make us less prepared and put us all at greater risk.
This is bigger than a singular elimination of race and ethnicity questions. It could accelerate the second wave of widespread reductions to demographic data, leaving public health officials with even less information to deliver better health outcomes for all Americans.
Soft law was never meant to be a permanent solution. Treating it as one, and letting the sandcastle stand in for the skyscraper indefinitely, is how we end up with a decade of voluntary commitments and no enforceable accountability to show for it.