Congressional info and the web

[Steve]

x-no-archive: yes

========================

How Congress Resists the Web   

by Eve Gerber   


(Slate)---The simplest way the Internet can enhance democracy is by 
making buried information easily available to citizens. By putting 
documents of all kinds online, agencies let in disinfecting sunlight 
and make themselves accountable to the public. By and large, the 
federal government has made impressive strides toward making 
itself Web-accessible. But there's one big exception: the U.S. 
Congress.   

Congress is ostensibly fascinated with cyberspace. Fifty Web-
related bills and resolutions are pending on Capitol Hill. Over 100 
members of Congress participate in an Internet caucus. Yet, when it 
comes to posting basic information about its inner workings, 
Congress has been shamefully slow. The result is that it protects 
the privileged status of corporate lobbyists and insulates back-room 
deals from public scrutiny while fencing out concerned and engaged 
citizens.   

Let's say you want to find out something about the latest draft of a 
bill. You might try the home pages of the House and Senate, which 
link to Capitol Hill tourism tips and member home pages. But these 
sites provide scattershot coverage of legislation revisions. Nor are 
the pages of the legislation's sponsors likely to help. Most of these 
are filled with promotional dross. Biographical information, press 
releases, and lengthy legislative accomplishment lists are 
complemented by intern solicitations and flag request forms. Sen. 
Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., includes his recipe for Chocolate Nut Pie.   

You may get closer to what you're looking for at GPO Access, a 
Government Printing Office site where citizens can download 
legislation and search Congressional Record archives. The clumsy 
and confusing THOMAS--a Library of Congress site--duplicates some 
of this information. It contains bills, roll-call votes, and links to 
congressional committee sites. But neither of these sites gives you 
the up-to-date information that might enable you to understand how a 
bill is working its way through the legislative process.   

"There is much more information online about Congress than at any 
time in history," according to Jason Poblete, a spokesman for the 
House Administration Committee. That is undoubtedly true, but it's 
hardly a meaningful statement. There is far less information about 
Congress online than there should and easily could be. Here is 
what's missing and why:   

Working Drafts of Bills and Amendments. Citizens can access bills, 
but working drafts are rarely posted. That's because under current 
policy, THOMAS cannot post an update until the text is processed by 
the Government Printing Office. The delay guarantees that lobbyists 
have time to get drafts and influence the process before the general 
public knows what's happening. Adam Thierer, Internet policy 
analyst for the Heritage Foundation, says that "the messy nature of 
the legislative process makes it difficult to keep a site up to date." 
But Gary Ruskin of the Congressional Accountability Project, a 
Ralph Nader-related organization that watches Congress, asserts 
that committee chairmen squelch the posting of drafts because, "If 
citizens figured out what was in some of these bills, there would be 
public outcry against them."   

Hearing Transcripts and Statements. To find out about 
congressional hearings, the curious must locate the appropriate 
committee site. Some committees post opening remarks and 
transcripts, but the coverage is scattershot. THOMAS publishes 
hearing testimony, but it often takes months before the transcripts 
are "processed." While the public waits, lobbyists purchase 
uncorrected transcripts from pricey transcription agencies. Poblete 
counsels patience and claims that all committees will offer video 
archives of hearings someday. In the meantime, Congress could 
make all its committees' hearings available with the help of a few 
$200 scanners.   

Congressional Research Service Reports. Congress spends over 
$64 million a year on a research service that analyzes thousands of 
issues, from abortion to Zambia. The reports, which are often 
excellent, are public documents that the public can't easily get its 
hands on. Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., posts several hundred CRS 
reports on his site, and members give them away in response to 
specific constituent requests. Still, citizens often have to wait weeks 
for research that a congressional staffer can download in seconds. 
As a result, commercial services are able to make money selling 
bootleg copies. Penny Hill Press, for instance, peddles CRS reports 
for $49 per order. Why not put these guys out of business? Ruskin 
contends that Congress hoards the reports because "members see 
CRS as their own fiefdom and they like the ability to give reports as 
a favor to constituents." A congressional task force is "considering" 
making all CRS reports public. It is supposed to report its 
conclusions by the end of the year.   

Voting Records. To find out how a member voted on a particular bill, 
citizens must comb through archives of roll-call votes, which are 
categorized by bill number and searchable by topic. Constituents 
can't search by representative name, at least at any official 
government site. Ruskin argues that "easily searchable voting 
records are essential to democratic accountability." Poblete says 
Congress is considering how to make voting records easier to 
access.   

Lobbyist Disclosure Reports. These reports detail how much 
lobbyists are paid to work on a particular issue and in theory what, 
who, and how they lobby. They can make for very interesting 
reading, but to get them you have to go in person to a little office in 
the Capitol. Ruskin argues that posting the reports would allow 
citizens to trace patterns of influence. Citizens are not able to 
access these reports online, even though they are electronically 
stored. Poblete claims that the reports will be posted as soon as 
Congress resolves "technical hurdles."   

House, Senate, and Personal Financial Disclosure Reports. 
Members must report how they spend their "representational 
allowances" and have to file personal financial disclosure reports. 
The disclosures can be used to ferret out wrongdoing and conflicts 
of interest. The data are computerized, but for "policy reasons" the 
reports are not available online. Congress is "reconsidering" 
whether to post them, according to Poblete.   

Five years ago, Speaker-elect Newt Gingrich promised to make 
important information available online "at the same moment that it is 
available to the highest-paid Washington lobbyist." That did happen, 
but only once--when Congress instantaneously published the Starr 
Report. When it comes to its own dirty laundry, there seems to be     
no such hurry.





* * * * * * * * * * * * * *  From the Listowner  * * * * * * * * * * * *
.	To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
majordomo at scn.org		In the body of the message, type:
unsubscribe scn
==== Messages posted on this list are also available on the web at: ====
* * * * * * *     http://www.scn.org/volunteers/scn-l/     * * * * * * *