Here we go...
Admittedly we will never achieve 100% governmental transparency. It's just not going to happen. There are too many things that just "shouldn't" be said, especially at the national level. BUT, we can certainly take everything not labeled as "Top Secret" or "SUPER-SECRET" and mark them for a level of open-ness and public reporting never seen before. The nuances of governmental spending are difficult to understand. Indeed they're even difficult for our own governments to understand most of the time. However, not sharing and explaining these nuances to 'the people' is a level of distrust bordering on disgrace and it must be stopped. Enacting a measure of this method and magnitude will take both time, precision and daring. To pull it off we'll need help from everyone across the board and we'll need a level of control of information never seen before. What I am getting at is full disclosure of expenditures including posting online in a live feed the budgets of each department; costs for planned projects vs the amount they have currently spent on those projects; salary rates of key administrative staff including the Mayor, top advisers, chiefs and undersecretaries of other government agencies. The information should be disclosed via the web openly without passworded access. It should be available in PDF format for later review compiled live via the proper development libraries for doing so (such as those included with PHP) and a catalog of the files should be kept daily in an attempt to provide the public with an open and accessible nuanced record which they can review and plead for or against. Many nay-sayers of transparency feel that transparency inhibits the employees of the government from properly doing their jobs. I decry this opinion as I personally feel that if they were properly doing their jobs in the first place we would have relative transparency. Governmental transparency should also help with public opinion regarding any particular office, and allows the government to dismiss employees not performing to appropriate levels of standard. I bring this topic forth without regret, as I see it as a necessity for curing the ills and ailments of a city going in the wrong direction. It is also part of the inertial momentum required to push the same level of transparency into still higher levels of government such as County, State and Federal. Such an undertaking most certainly can and should be undertaken. Without public review their can be no proper oversight. Committees rarely work as they're often inhibited from access to information that is constantly changing, and form records which some may feel outside their purview. I see in Cincinnati the readiness and ability to take a progressive step of this magnitude. It should please the Republican majority here which claim fiscal conservativeness as the newfound ability to review expenditures in real-time brings new power to public oversight. The Democrats can relax knowing neither party can bring forth expenses on pet-projects without seeking wrath of public opinion on their ideas and projects. A balance to fiscal control is restored and true oversight becomes possible when absolutely everyone has a peek at the checkbook. We'll be able to see and understand the magnitude of expenses which our government(s) undertake. We'll be able to openly chastize projects coming in over budget, and know just how much is left over for the rare few that come in under it. There are some risks. Full disclosure brings with it concerns of losing some businesses who see subsidies being provided to their competitors. We also risk alienating certain segments of local society who may be concerned with levels of city income being spent in areas which don't need as much attention. Finally concerns are likely to be waged that converting to the proper level of transparency will cost too much for it to be worth it. I'll tackle these in reverse order because I find it simplest to do so. The cost of not converting to full disclosure transparency is much greater than the temporary costs brought on by the conversion. The cost to faith in American style Democracy and civilian trust in the government has already run too high. To clip it now and repair what damage we can is the best course. Full Transparency may raise costs during the three to five year transition as each department's reporting structure changes and the government employees become trained in how to best apply and work with the technologies. But, after the deployment period, while there will be some upkeep and continued development costs, the system is likely to save the Cincinnati government hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, perhaps more. Concerns over the reality of richer segments of the city receiving a higher proportion of city funds and the realizations which come with that will indeed bring a great deal of resentment and anger. Reversing this however should be the voices from the city shouting that the new tool gives them power to change this. To open and further public discussion on where public funds are best spent and to lobby for their neighborhoods. Increased participation in government and seeing impact each person has should usher in a new renaissance for American politics and bring forth a newfound pride in each of the boroughs of the city. In regards to business withdrawal. It is inevitable that some businesses will find their competitors being subsidized as being unfair. It is an unfortunate circumstance which is a stark reality of American capitalism. Some will leave, likely to the other side of the river or just beyond the city's corporate limits. Most will simply voice opposition to the uncompetitive advantage given their competitors. However, in all the jobs are not likely to go far enough to entice their employees to move or migrate. This isn't as much of a worry as some would have us believe. This has been the first in a series of government review posts I will have here. If you have anything to add, please post in the comments. I do very much look forward to reading contrary statements. Next in the series I hope to cover the benefits to outsourcing of government jobs to the private sector.post a comment
Post Comment
We welcome comments on this article, provided they have something to contribute. Please note that all links will be created using the nofollow attribute. This is a spam free zone. HTML is stripped from comments, but BBCode is allowed.