TITLE IX - Enforcement

Sec. 901. GAO Audits. (5 Comments)

See also the Open Government Data Principles for the source of these principles.

The GAO shall conduct annual audits of congressional and executive branch transparency, and shall report annually to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in the House and Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs in the Senate on the implementation of the provisions in this act. Specifically, the audits will address whether the congressional and executive branch information that is required to be provided to the public through the Internet is: complete, primary, timely, accessible, machine processable, non-discriminatory, non-proprietary, and license-free.
Definitions. In this Act:
1. The term complete means all public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.
2. The term primary means data collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.
3. The term timely means data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.
4. The term accessible means data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.
5. The term machine processable means data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.
6. The term non-discriminatory means data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.
7. The term non-proprietary means data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.
8. The term license-free means data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark, or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security, and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

5 comments on Sec. 901. GAO Audits.

This is one of the most interesting sections, and it would be interesting to read about the motivation to make this assessed in an audit, rather than a requirement. I like it. Some thoughts:

Would it make sense to also actually require that all data/documents covered by the bill (and other data/documents not covered) is made available under these principles? It could be specified in one place, rather than a few explicit remarks about it in specific sections.

Should these principles be fleshed out a bit? Would that help in making it additionally a requirement?

Maybe it would make sense to note something about how the principles should be assessed relative to current, changing technology and best practices. Is the data not just, say, "machine processable" relative to the standards of 2008, but keeping up with evolving standards for publishing data? Maybe the principles themselves need to be reevaluated regularly.

Also, one component of the principles that I pushed for but that got relegated to an afterthought is making sure compliance with the principles is reviewable by the public. Is it meeting *our* standards? Are they listening to *our* suggestions (as the intended users of the data/documents)? Is there two-way communication?
posted by Joshua Tauberer, GovTrack.us at April 2, 2008
(a.) Add a plain english requirement.

Point 9. The format shall be key word searchable.

Point 10. Plain English means expressed in ordinary language, eighth grade level, free of jargon and obscure legal language.

In support of Mr. Tauberer's comment, two way communication is required if accountability for the audit is to be present. Although this can be burdensome it is absolutely necessary if clarity, credibility and responsibility are to be maintained.
posted by Chuck Fellows at April 4, 2008
We need specific penalities for withholding information that would show criminal acts, be the acts misdemeanors or felonies.
We need specific investigative mechanisms that will be invoked upon proper complaints.
If the complaints are found to be true, the costs of the investigations and prosecutions must be paid by the individuals or their agency.
Dwight Hines
AlternativeMedia
150 Nesmith Ave.
St. Augustine, Florida 32084
dwighthines@bellsouth.net
posted by Dwight Hines, AlternativeMedia at April 6, 2008
It seems like this section requires Congress to enforce the rules in this bill on itself. The GAO seems like a good office to do the reporting, but what if the House and Senate committees let things slide? Should we try to make it one of the checks and balances that either the executive or judicial branch has over Congress or crimes as Mr. Hines mentioned above?
posted by VC at April 15, 2008
One thing I would suggest adding in the enforcement section is random, bipartisan audits of the lawmaker disclosure forms.

Currently, there is very little oversight of the accuracy of Financial Disclosure Reports filed by our elected officials. At best, the limited staff of the House & Senate ethics committees should conduct cursory reviews. The prospect of the risk of a random audit by a financial professional may very well act as a deterrent to a Member of Congress seeking to file a misleading Financial Disclosure Report.

Even if it was only 10 lawmakers a year (5 Dems and 5 R's). I think it would make a huge difference
posted by Keith Ashdown - Taxpayers for Common Sense at April 21, 2008

Comment on Sec. 901. GAO Audits.

(You may comment anonymously. Moderators may remove offensive or off-topic comments.)

The Sunlight Foundation supports, develops and deploys new Internet technologies to make information about Congress and the federal government more accessible to the American people. Through its projects and grant-making, Sunlight serves as a catalyst to create greater political transparency and to foster more openness and accountability in government. This Site may contain links to Internet sites that are not operated by Sunlight Foundation. These links are provided as a service and do not imply any endorsement of the activities or content of these sites, nor any association with their operators. Sunlight Foundation does not control these Internet sites and is not responsible for their content, security, or privacy practices. We urge you to review the privacy policy posted on web sites you visit before using the site or providing personal information.