The Pelican Post

The latest example of astonishing wasteful government spending in Post-Katrina New Orleans was described in a recent report by the Times-Picayune. In this example of progress impeded by bureaucratic incompetence, a study by a federal inspector general found that 80% of sampled recipients of Road Home elevation grants in 2006 and 2007 failed to use the grants for its intended purpose: to elevate their homes.

That means that 80% of the $3.8 million granted to this sample pool was wasted. Worse, officials fear the second round of grants in 2008 and 2009 could also have been squandered. This just highlights the need for internal auditing and transparency of government expenditures, as well as further private (re: efficient) financing of rebuilding efforts in the New Orleans area.

Of course, private investment cannot be the sole source of rebuilding in New Orleans. Government has an important role to play in emergency situations such as a natural disaster. But government cannot make effective use of taxpayer money if it lacks the necessary auditing. With better oversight and increased transparency, this money could help far more people rebuild than it currently does.

The Jefferson political dynasty seems to have finally collapsed under its squalid foundation of greed and deceit. This week Betty Jefferson has resigned her post as the 4th district assessor following pressure from her fellow assessors.

The resignation follows her guilty plea to swindling money from both her office and from nonprofit groups funded by taxpayers. Apparently, her reported $90,000 a year salary wasn’t enough to satiate her greed. (For a powerful indictment of Betty Jefferson, read Jarvis DeBerry’s excoriation of her in the Times-Picayune).

Despite the black eye that this episode has left on the city, it seems the municipal government has learned a lesson. The seven assessor offices have been consolidated into one city-wide office, which Erroll Williams was elected to this past February.

Limiting the number of bureaucratic offices, such as consolidating 7 assessor offices into one, will both allow the municipal government to run more efficiently, as well as prevent abuse of office by allowing for more transparency and auditing. This case illustrates the need to eliminate superfluous government offices, which as the precedent shows, lead to wasteful spending and corruption.

Additionally, Betty Jefferson’s case serves to illuminate the troubles which inevitably follow government-subsidized non-profit organizations. As demonstrated by both Ms. Jefferson and ACORN, the usage of tax-payers money to subsidize non-profits which are then manipulated and exploited for political ends illustrates the need to decrease, or end, such practices altogether.

It is absolutely imperative that federal, state and local government implement more transparency.  Taxpayers have a right to see how their money is being spent. How many more scandals will it take to elicit action from our elected officials?

In an ironic twist, Vice-President Biden’s meeting on transparency was closed to the press.  The LA Times reported:

In fact, today’s Biden schedule highlight is a meeting with the chief of transparency for economic recovery. But, unfortunately, the transparency meeting is non-transparent, closed to the press. Which makes it — what? — secret openness? Open secrecy?

For all the promises of transparency from both the President and Vice-President on the campaign trail, their record of carrying through with such promises leaves something to be desired.

The latest candidate forum took place on Friday, January 15^th at Loyola University New Orleans and had as the central topic public corruption.

Since the beginning of the mayor’s race candidates have shed light on the worse features of New Orleans, public corruption being just one of them. Acknowledging the city’s weaknesses and proposing solutions are essential steps for a better New Orleans. However, addressing the problems only during the mayor’s race and forgetting about them after Election Day is not effective.

Corruption should be constantly controlled and minimized. The passion with which the candidates outlined their plans needs to persist after the winner has been inaugurated.

Why is public corruption such a terrible trait for a city?

Not only does political corruption deny citizens the ability to rely on their local government, it also limits the city’s economic growth. Looking at New Orleans it seems clear that corruption goes hand in hand with a low economic growth rate. A high level of corruption has been associated with a low level of investment, which then causes a lower per capita income. Political corruption behaves like a tax by diminishing incentives to invest, reducing the effectiveness of government expenditures, and limiting economic growth. Overall, corruption is a negative-sum game (we all lose.)

How can public corruption be minimized?

A transparent and accountable administration that discloses all public budget and contracting information would reduce the incentives and opportunities for corruption. What’s more, reducing the power of public officials would eliminate incentives to demand bribes. Transparency and limited government have to be on politicians’ agendas in order to effectively fight corruption in New Orleans.

It was encouraging to hear six out of six candidates stress the need for transparency along with full disclosure of information. They also expressed the need to increase the accountability of the local government and guarantee zero tolerance on corruption. These are essential elements for an honest, transparent administration. Will the future mayor of New Orleans keep in mind the promises and the passion with which corruption was addressed? We hope so.

More details on Friday’s mayoral forum can be found on NOLA.com.

Jim Harper of the Cato Institute has posted his analysis of where President Obama currently stands on his pledge to post all legislation online for five full days before signing it into law.  Harper concludes that:

• President Obama has signed 114 bills into law.
• 86 of those bills, or 75%, have been held at the White House for five or more days as a matter of course. Simply posting them on Whitehouse.gov for comment would have fulfilled the president’s pledge.
• Forty-seven bills (41%) have been posted on Whitehouse.gov for five days, but without links leading visitors or search engines to them, so they cannot be counted as fulfillments of the Sunlight Before Signing promise.
• One bill has been posted online for five days, accessible to the public for their review, before receiving the president’s signature: The DTV Delay Act, Public Law 111-4.

Harper notes that a “link on the homepage [of the White House] pointing to bills awaiting the president’s signature” is now available, and predicts that the percentage of bills fulfilling the President’s campaign pledge will greatly increase.

The Pelican Institute applauds the move by the White House to ensure greater transparency and hopes that this trend will continue.