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.
When properly structured — with specific numeric targets, secured financial obligations, independent monitoring, and meaningful enforcement — CBAs transform data center deals into durable community partnerships.
Protecting the public from the tech industry’s predatory business models and the next wave of AI harms is an enormous challenge, but we have the evidence that trying to build a healthier digital culture is absolutely worth the effort.
Opaque and insufficiently tested tools are increasingly shaping student outcomes without consistent transparency, civil rights review, or technical safeguards. States and the U.S. Department of Education can address these risks using procurement and oversight tools already within their authority.
Commercial artificial intelligence tools have recently emerged that are able to produce police reports. If the resulting reports are inaccurate, incomplete or biased, or if the process leaks confidential information, this could undermine the criminal justice system and harm citizens.