By Lyle Hickman and Billy Hallowell, VoterWatch Staff

This week’s Transparency Recap opens with a Corruption Chronicles blog entry entitled “‘Nonpartisan’ La Raza Council Endorses Obama.” The National Council of La Raza was founded in 1968 in Washington D.C. as a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization. While the organization touts nonpartisan status, Judicial Watch (via its blog, the Corruption Chronicles) is charging partisan support for the presumed Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. According to Corruption Chronicles:

“. . . La Raza President Janet Murguia stood by as Los Angeles’ renowned Chicano mayor (Antonio Villaraigosa) praised the Illinois senator during the group’s annual convention in San Diego. A former Hillary Clinton campaign chairman, Villaraigosa assured the crowd of thousands that Obama is Latinos’ best hope for reforming the nation’s federal immigration policies.”

Moving on, ABC News’ The Blotter covers a warning issued by the United States embassy located in Baghdad, Iraq. According to The Blotter, “Weapons are continuing to be left unattended throughout the Embassy compound . . .” Unattended weaponry in an embassy is unacceptable, especially when considering the current situation in Iraq. The war makes the embassy a prime target of the Iraqi insurgents. According to The Blotter the U.S. embassy warns its employees and cohorts:

“. . . Just to be clear, the embassy reminds employees:

-- Don’t leave your gun unattended when using the embassy pool. “If using the Embassy Pool, you must designate a gear guard.”
-- Don’t leave guns unattended in vehicles, even if the vehicle is locked.
-- And don’t carry your gun if you’ve been drinking. “No weapon will be carried while drinking alcoholic beverages.”

Anyone caught violating the rules will have his or her weapons confiscated, the document warns, and a supervisor will have to sign a letter requesting that it be returned after the individual has “been counseled on proper weapons retention . . .”

In other news, Secrecy News penned a piece about the “Foreign Relations of the United States”—a series that the State Department defines as ”. . . [a presentation of] the official documentary historical record of major U.S. foreign policy decisions and significant diplomatic activity. The series, which is produced by the State Department’s Office of the Historian, began in 1861 and now comprises more than 350 individual volumes.”

While one can easily see the importance of such an official historical account of U.S. activity, Secrecy News reports the following:

“The “Foreign Relations of the United States” (FRUS) series . . . remains unlikely to meet the legal requirement that it be published no later than 30 years after the events that it describes, an official advisory committee has told the Secretary of State.”

Over on the Sunlight blogs, Ellen Miller covers the growing divide between Sen. Joe Lieberman and the Democratic Party. According to Miller,

“The Connecticut Independent’s high-profile support for the Iraq War and a bellicose demeanor toward Iran, as well as his enthusiastic endorsement of and active campaigning for Sen. John McCain’s presidential bid and his criticism of Sen. Barack Obama as the presumptive Democratic nominee, have all helped to put his relationship with the Democrats in quite the precarious spot.”

The relationship is in such shambles that left-wing activists are petitioning for Lieberman to be stripped of his rank and removed from his Homeland Security chairmanship. Democrats are calling for these actions to be taken following the 2008 presidential election in November.

And in other news, former Arlington National Cemetery Public Affairs Director Gina Gray was allegedly fired for advocating for more media access to soldiers’ funeral processions. After publicly disclosing the fact that ceremony officials are not allowing media access at funerals—even after families agreed to said coverage—Gray was fired. All Things Whistleblower poses an interesting thought regarding the next administration:

“With the images of funerals being so powerful, and thought of to raise the conscious level of the casualties of war, it will be very interesting to see how this issue is handled by the next presidential  administration.”

In closing, OpenSecrets.org’s Capital Eye is ”Calling All Citizen Journalists.” Check the contest out and you could potentially win $100!

By Eric Margulies, VoterWatch

On May 24, 2007, Congress passed the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007. For many, the bill signifies the government’s movement toward more citizen access and government transparency. While the bill certainly poses a victory to the open government community, its overall impact must be properly assessed, as valid criticisms can surely be posed.

Beginning at the end of July 2008, lobbyists will have to disclose campaign contributions, which include contributions made through a political action committee owned or controlled by the lobby, lawmaker honorary expenses, expenses for meetings with lawmakers, and donations to presidential libraries.

The bill also disallows former senators and executive branch officials from lobbying Congress for at least two years after leaving their elected positions; former House members must wait only one year.

These developments undoubtedly show the increasing support that the notion of open government is getting amongst members of the legislative branch. These changes also pave the way for unprecedented transparency that will enable citizens to see the machinations of what was previously known as “backroom politics.”

This transparency will logically lead to further accountability on the part of lobbies, which may considerably decrease the incestuous cronyism that tends to permeate the political system. The bill itself says that it will work towards “closing of the revolving door.”

While Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 was clearly the right move, the bill isn’t without its faults. To begin, there are concerns about just how much transparency this bill can provide, as questions surround loopholes and the required frequency of reporting. On the Sunlight blogs, Ellen Miller recently questioned the provision that requires lobbyists to file only two times each year:

“I was struck by the lack of timeliness of these new reports. Being filed only twice a year raises the question: how much transparency will these forms actually provide? With all the online tools we have access to today, why not have instantaneous disclosure? Why wait six months, when the money changing hands is affecting legislation being written today? It seems to me that this new requirement will give us some more information about the role of the power lobbyist, it does little to deal with the most critical problem - the timeliness of reporting.”

When the July 30^th deadline for filing passes, some of the questions regarding the bill will likely be answered and a few new questions may also arise. Many Americans see lobbying as one of the many symbols of government corruption and sketchy politics.

Simply speaking, the word conjures up images of unfair patronage and back room deals being made in smoky rooms somewhere not far from K Street. However, if this bill does as it promises or simply sets into motion a chain of events leading to further disclosure, the popular conception of lobbies as insider-only political machines may be drastically altered.

Happy Independence Day, America (a little late)! We hope everyone enjoyed the holiday. Today, we’re going to recap some of the best in transparency and citizen engagement news from the end of last week through today—Monday, July 07, 2008.

Today’s recap starts with a piece entitled, “Red, White and Green” from the Capital Eye blog. While our entire nation has been celebrating our independence from Great Britain, we might actually be more dependent than we realize. According to Capital Eye,

“...36 current members of Congress have collected at least 20 percent of their contributions from a single industry, setting up a scheme of dependence and perhaps the expectation of a tit-for-tat.”

Moreover, this dependency on certain industries should concern Americans. If our representatives in government are receiving money from companies, organizations and specific industries, how likely are they to represent our interests over the interests of their donors?

And over on the Corruption Chronicles blog, Detroit is the subject of conversation. According to CC, the city’s governing council is being investigated by the federal government for allegedly accepting bribes; the bribes were allegedly accepted by council members in exchange for the approval of a multi million dollar contract. According to CC:

“...several members of the Detroit City Council are suspected of taking bribes to approve a $47 million contract last fall with a Houston company to handle sludge waste from the city’s wastewater treatment plant. The FBI has electronic surveillance evidence of City Council President Pro Tem Monica Conyers taking bribes from the company, Synagro Technologies.”

In other news, Karl Rove will not be testifying in front of the House Judiciary Committee. According to CREW, Rove has apparently invoked executive privilege. According to Politico (as per CREW):

“Karl Rove, former White House deputy chief of staff and President Bush’s top political adviser, is refusing to appear before the House Judiciary Committee to testify on “politicization” within the Justice Dept. Rove had been scheduled to appear next Thursday, July 10.”

And over on the Washington Post’s Indep Dump blog, focus is centered upon detainees who have been apprehended abroad. Over the past six-and-a-half years, detainees apprehended in the War on Terror have been fingerprinted and processed. As it turns out, hundreds of these individuals have criminal records. According to Post:

“The records suggest that potential enemies abroad know a great deal about the United States because many of them have lived here, officials said. The matches also reflect the power of sharing data across agencies and even countries, data that links an identity to a distinguishing human characteristic such as a fingerprint.”

And over on the CommonBlog, it’s all about Iran/U.S. relations and the measures currently brewing in the House and Senate.

Also, be sure to check out TPM’s Daily Muck for intriguing daily news briefs.