Good Jobs First: State Governments Perform Poorly at Using Internet to Increase Transparency

Brant McLaughlin
On Thursday, the Corporate Research Project of Good Jobs First released a statement on the State of State Disclosure, in which it concludes that state governments' online disclosure of economic development subsidies lags behind reporting on procurement contracts and lobbying.

The research evaluated each state's disclosure websites in terms of criteria such as ease of searching and level of detail. Some states scored high in certain areas but low in others, and there were wide discrepancies between states. However, all states offer some measure of online lobbying disclosure.

"The Internet makes possible unprecedented government transparency, but many states have been slow to adopt vigorous online disclosure," said Good Jobs First Executive Director Greg LeRoy.

"The average state gets only B- on contracts and C- on lobbying. On subsidies, the average grade is F. No state receives better than B across all categories," said Philip Mattera, Research Director of Good Jobs First and principal author of the report.

Most subsidies that are given to corporations by state governments are know as discretionary subsidy deals and are intended to influence an investment decision. On the other hand, tax breaks or other entitlement-type subsidies are automatically available to all companies that meet certain criteria.

Discretionary subsidies are highly controversial. Their fiscal ramifications are dubious, and what's more they seem to be arbitrarily handed out by bureaucrats.

As a result, say their critics, communities conflict with each other as they get into bidding wars to be awarded the subsidy, and companies can be guilty of conjuring fake reasons for intending to move away so as to extort subsidies to finance an ability or willingness to remain.

Other critics assert that the elimination of all corporate subsidizing would allow governments to balance their budgets more effectively and drastically cut taxes on both individuals and businesses. These say that while grants that are competed for can be a good idea to help shape a community in the best interests of the populace and local environment, subsidizing of private interests has no proper place in government and is a bad idea that promotes cronyism and lobbying instead of competition and innovation.

Others, however, label such laissez-faire methods for encouraging local and state economic growth "fascism", although they acknowledge that a government's adjunct-to-private-industry programs usually end up turning into virtual government monopolies and harm advancement and quality.

The report concludes that all states should enhance disclosure to include data on outcomes; enhance subsidy and contract disclosure to include data on the past performance of companies; and, combine disclosure about subsidies, contracts and lobbying with data on campaign contributions.

Original Newswire Source:
http://prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/11-15-2007/0004706736&EDATE=

Published by Brant McLaughlin

I am a Writer driven by endless curiosity and a deep desire to waste time creatively.  View profile

1 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Heretik aka Nick Poma11/15/2007

    Terrific article. I know that I have found a lot of information that the government has posted on the web that just a few years ago I would never have even been aware of. The Internet is a vast resource of knowledge and keeping government honest is a good side effect.

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.