Illini Fighting Release of Admissions Clout List

The Chicago Tribune's "Clout Goes to College" investigation into a scandal at the University of Illinois involving admissions of "subpar but politically connected applicants" over more qualified applicants. The newspaper is challenging the university's refusal to release hundreds of names of applicants and any law enforcement subpoenas received by the school as well as the results of a July poll of alumni and other respondents.  

So far the fallout from the scandal includes U. of I. President B. Joseph White, who announced his resignation last month, and the replacement of six university trustees.  

The legal battle playing out in a Sangamon County court pits student privacy against public disclosure. 

Get more details here. 

Most states fail to use Web to inform about stimulus spending

Good Jobs First, a non-profit research center based in Washington, D.C., studied state Web sites to determine the quality and quantity of disclosure related to how stimulus funding is being divided up among communities, organizations and individuals. Each state was graded twice on a scale of 0 to 100. Only six states scored 50 or better for their main American Recovery and Reinvestment Act site. Thirteen scored 50 or better for their highway reporting. Illinois scored a zero in both categories because it only provides national figures.

While some states have created impressive websites to disseminate information about their share of the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), most are failing to make effective use of online technology to educate taxpayers about the impact of economic stimulus spending. This is the finding of Show Us the Stimulus, a report released today by Good Jobs First, a non-profit research center based in Washington, DC.

“Many states are failing to support President Obama’s vow that the Recovery Act will be carried out with an unprecedented level of transparency and accountability,” said Good Jobs First executive director Greg LeRoy. “By failing to use broadly available web tools, they are making it more difficult to measure the success of ARRA in mitigating the effects of the recession.”

Read the full report here.

Judge's omission may cost her a fortune

FOI AT WORK!

The Dallas Morning News analyzed public records and discovered that Sharon Keller, the presiding judge of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, failed to disclose "all beneficial interests in real property" to the Texas Ethics Commission. The commission is investigating her for allegedly refusing to allow a prison row inmate's lawyers to file a plea pass 5 p.m. closing time in order to stop the execution, which occurred within hours. Apparently, the ethics commission doesn't routinely check the completeness of these financial disclosure reports, but The Dallas Morning News did.

The presiding judge of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, while seeking state aid to defend herself against ethics charges, failed to abide by legal requirements that she disclose nearly $2 million in real estate holdings, according to an analysis of public records by The Dallas Morning News.

Sharon Keller has sought dismissal of the charges on grounds that it would be "financially ruinous" for her to pay private counsel to fight allegations brought by the state Commission on Judicial Conduct that she violated her duties in a death penalty appeal.

Keller, the state's highest criminal court judge, faces possible removal from office if a special master agrees that she blocked a condemned inmate's last-minute effort to stop his execution in 2007 by refusing to extend the court's 5 p.m. closing time to allow his lawyers to file their plea. The inmate, Michael Richard, was executed within hours.

More here.

Holder issues new FOIA guidelines

In accordance with President Obama's call for a presumption of openness, Attorney General Eric Holder's memo directs agencies not to withhold records just because they can technically do so. Agencies are encouraged to make discretionary disclosures or partial releases of records that can't be released in full. Another change is that no longer will the department defend a denial of a request simply because the agency had a "sound legal basis" for withholding the documents. It will only defend denials in which disclosure is prohibited by law or would harm an interest protected by a statutory exemption.

Attorney General Eric Holder issued comprehensive new Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) guidelines today that direct all executive branch departments and agencies to apply a presumption of openness when administering the FOIA. The new guidelines, announced in a memo to heads of executive departments and agencies, build on the principles announced by President Obama on his first full day in office when he issued a presidential memorandum on the FOIA that called on agencies to "usher in a new era of open government." At that time, President Obama also instructed Attorney General Holder to issue new FOIA guidelines that reaffirm the government’s commitment to accountability and transparency. The memo rescinds the guidelines issued by the previous administration.

"By restoring the presumption of disclosure that is at the heart of the Freedom of Information Act, we are making a critical change that will restore the public’s ability to access information in a timely manner," said Attorney General Holder. "The American people have the right to information about their government’s activities, and these new guidelines will ensure they are able to obtain that information under principles of openness and transparency."

The new FOIA guidelines address both application of the presumption of disclosure and the effective administration of the FOIA across the government. As to the presumption of disclosure, the Attorney General directs agencies not to withhold records simply because they can technically do so. In his memo, the Attorney General encourages agencies to make discretionary disclosures of records and to release records in part whenever they cannot be released in full.

More here.

Download PDF of guidelines here.

Transparency after a done deal does little good

The new Right-to-Know Law makes it only voluntarily for Pennsylvania school boards to disclose the terms of contract proposals before they are signed.

Pennsylvania taxpayers have a right to know what their respective school districts are doing -- before it's too late to do anything about it.

The commonwealth's new Right-to-Know Law should have ensured complete transparency. Unfortunately, it does not, according to Terry Mutchler, executive director of the new Office of Open Records.

The public has every right to demand accountability. It should never be forced to come to school boards, hat in hand, begging to be given information about the untold costs to taxpayers.

More here.

Act would require drug manufacturers to disclose payments

Disclosure is slowly becoming vogue everywhere. Therefore, you may see less of those prescription drug ink pens and notepads in your physician's office. The Physician Payments Sunshine Act would require companies to disclose money, trinkets, etc. (worth $100 or more) given to physicians. The information would be available online through the Department of Health and Human Services.

Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Herb Kohl (D-WI) reintroduced their Physician Payments Sunshine Act, which would require that manufacturers and group purchasing organizations disclose all payments or transfers of value to physicians worth $100 or more.

The revised bill includes language mandating disclosure of physician investments in and ownership of manufacturers, and it has sharper teeth. Manufacturers or group purchasing organizations that fail to report payments can be fined between $1,000 and $10,000 per infraction, up to a total fine of $150,000 per company per year, where failure to report is deemed an oversight. For “knowing failure to report,” the ceiling on total fines goes up to $1 million per company.

More here.

Did data disclosure play a role in financial crisis?

There is much disagreement on this question. Naturally, Wall Street blamed disclosure of balance sheet information. Others say the data disclosed through the current accounting method may be misleading. Some experts agree with Charles Mulford who said disclosure "helped to make this crisis less of a crisis, if that's possible."

In the midst of the nation's current financial crisis -- including Monday's historic 777-point Dow drop and Congress's efforts to bail out the financial services industry -- transparency has been a key part of the debate: how much should be disclosed, when and by whom.

Last week, Wall Street blamed its woes in part on accounting rules that require regular release of balance sheet information. To wit: one article on the issue bore the headline, “Wall St. Points to Disclosure As Issue.”

Some experts say the problem is not that banks and other financial services companies are required to give out more data than before, or that they’re not following the rules, but others disagree.

More here.