Iowa receives ‘F’ for online access to government data

Iowa residents have not yet been given the tools they need to track government spending, and trust in government has suffered as a consequence, according to a new report issued by a national public watchdog group.

The report, “Following the Money: How the 50 States Rate in Providing Online Access to Government Spending Data,” tracks state progress toward a new age of transparency that includes comprehensive, one-stop, one-click budget accountability and accessibility. Although three of Iowa’s neighbors — Minnesota, Illinois and Missouri — were given high rankings in the federation of state Public Interest Research Groups (U.S. PIRG) study, Iowa and 17 other states received a letter grade of “F.”

Of the states that received the lowest ranking, Iowa is one of 14 that have not launched a Web site that allows citizen access to government spending records. Although the state legislature has considered, as recently as 2009, development of such a Web site, it has yet to win passage.

Kentucky, the highest ranking state in the study, launched Open Door Kentucky on Jan. 1, 2009. The site allows visitors to easily search, view contracts past and present, search by contractor or type of activity contracted for, and see explanations of the purpose of individual contracts. Tax subsidies and economic development grants are included, as are expenditures by some quasi-public agencies.

Similarly, the state of Illinois’ new Corporate Accountability Project tracks grants to companies for job creation — and provides yearly reports signed by company chief executives detailing how many jobs were actually created.

“Given the severity of their budget problems, states need to step up and improve the ability to see where tax dollars go,” said Phineas Baxandall, senior analyst for tax and budget policy at U.S. PIRG and co-author of the report. “Public officials need to be held accountable for contracting, subsidies and grants in the same way they are for spending decisions in the budget.”

The organization believes that state Web sites should be a one-stop source for budget information — and should include a comprehensive and understandable list of all financial information in one place, allowing citizens to easily view local spending, investments or vendor payments.

Residents who are able to search data with a single query or browse common-sense categories and then sort results by recipient, amount, legislative district, granting agency, purpose or keyword are more likely to have confidence in government, according to the study authors.  The authors also argue that the launch and maintenance of such sites is relatively low-cost, and can translate into big savings for state governments.

Transparency Web sites can save millions through more efficient government operations, fewer manual information requests, more competitive contracting bids, and lower risk of fraud. In the two years following the launch of its transparency Web site, the Texas Comptroller reported $4.8 million in savings from more efficient government administration. Utah estimates millions in savings from reduced information requests. The largest savings may come from prevention of waste or abuse of public funds due to enhanced public scrutiny — savings that are impossible to quantify but likely significant.

Iowa’s transparency issues are not limited to spending, though. The Hawkeye State has often been a frontrunner in demanding that corporations become more transparent in their public dealings, but has not always demanded the same from its own institutions. For the fourth legislative session in a row, state lawmakers refused to establish an Iowa Public Information Board to enforce the state’s open-meetings and open-records law. As a result, many Iowa citizens end up waiting and paying for information that other states freely distribute on Web sites with the click of a button.

The Iowa Independent, as a part of its investigation into undisclosed, private use of rooms in the Iowa Statehouse, has spent more than $100 in order to obtain records from state officials — and has not yet obtained full disclosure of meetings that could impact and influence public policy in the state.

Although there have been improvements at the state level to provide more information to the public through the Internet, much of the work remains disjointed and difficult to access. For instance, the legislative site provides a direct link to “Lobbyist Information,” but within the interface there is no way to directly access a specific lobbyist, the company or agency he/she is lobbying for and the language of supported legislation. While all the information is available through the legislative interface, it is not connected in such a way that a single search will suffice.

The Iowa Courts’ online interface has similar challenges. The information available is not updated in real time, and past information is not always comprehensive enough to provide even those who pay a monthly fee for full access all necessary information. For instance, a jury verdict may be reported as “yes on question one” without providing further context.