Obama Aide Outlines Stimulus Requirements

Strict Guidelines Meant To Streamline Reports So They Can Be Displayed On White New White House Web Site

(CBS/AP)  President Barack Obama's top budget aides are putting in place strict reporting requirements for all federal agencies that will be involved in spending parts of the $787 billion economic stimulus package.

Obama's budget chief, Peter Orszag, released a 25,000-word document this week that details exactly how Cabinet and executive agencies, states and local organizations must report spending the money designed to save or create more than 3 million jobs over the next two years. It's a strict system meant to streamline reports so they can be displayed on the administration's new Web site, Recovery.gov.

"The administration is committed to investing Recovery Act dollars with an unprecedented level of transparency and accountability so Americans know where their tax dollars are going and how they are being spent," Orszag wrote in a memo that he posted online.

For instance, all "major communications," such as grant awards or infrastructure decisions, would have to be reported immediately to the Office of Management and Budget, which Orszag heads. And by March 3, OMB has ordered agencies to begin filing weekly reports of their stimulus spending activity to post online.

Orszag said the new reporting requirements are intended to ensure that "the recipients and uses of all funds are transparent to the public, and the public benefits of these funds are reported clearly, accurately and in a timely manner."

Starting in May, every entity receiving recovery dollars must submit a monthly report. Also that month, officials have to begin providing an agency-wide plan detailing how the money is being spent.

By July 10, every recipient of federal dollars will have to report how they're spending them.

It's part of Obama's pledge to make every piece of his massive stimulus plan transparent so Americans can see how and where their money is going. Before the announcement, watchdog groups and OMB aides worried they might not be able to deliver on Obama's ambitious plan.

But Orszag's memo makes clear that every project is going to have to be ready-to-post: no more than a five-sentence description, an explanation of why it's important, with promotional videos attached.

It's as much good governance as it is public relations. An Associated Press-GfK poll released Wednesday found public support dipped slightly in the past month for the package of tax cuts and government spending signed into law this week.

The document also requires all recipients to report cumulative spending, major actions and anything that senior government officials or Congress would care about. Orszag is asking for data by state, county or "other geographical unit," such as city or town. The idea is to help officials promote individual projects, such as a highway onramp or a school gymnasium that puts people to work.

The president's aides see it as part of a grassroots effort that helped win the November election, as well as a way to demonstrate he is bringing change - his campaign watchword - to Washington.

Some Republicans have been critical of the stimulus package.

On CBS' The Early Show South Carolina's Republican governor, Mark Sanford said Thursday the sheer size of the stimulus package will end up hindering any economic recovery.

"I think the problem that was created with too much debt will never be solved by adding yet more debt," he said. "I think there are a number of wrinkles that have caused a number of us to say 'Wait a minute, let's take a long look at whether or not this really makes sense for our state.'"

[start99]

I'm pissed about the presidents stimulus package. Just thinking. Do you know if he gave every American citizen 6 Million Dollars with of coarse many stipulations it would fix the banks auto industry and much more. He could give one billion to all the states and put a one billion price tag on Bin laden it would cost less than 100 billion dollars. Rather than give 786 billion to the deceitful thief's that got us into this situation in the first place.
Edward Lammens

[indamiddle]

the focus should be more on 'ENFORCING' these requirements...

[noloyalisti]

So all of a sudden the right wing hypocrites are worried about spending. What a sad sick joke.

Where were you when the neo con Nazis were lying us into illegal invasions? Or when they were handing trillions of our tax money to the banks and oil corporations? Or WHEN THE REPUBLICANs COMPLETELY RUINED THE AMERICAN ECONOMY and turned us into a 3rd world country. Don't make me laugh with your utter stupidity and propaganda Newspeak.

[national4321]

Unexamined candidates, candidates who seal records and use unacceptable tactics in their race to some goal should be recognized for what they are, thus, it should be no surprise that promises for the good of this nation have been broken, promises detrimental to this nation have been launched at warp speed.

He's a fraud, an utter fraud. It was easy to see.

But so many Americans were duped yet again, like they were by Fannie Mae and Fredie Mac.

Praising a man who has accomplished absolutely nothing but put this country in huge debt- is really, really ignorant.

Americans never learn.

[misha128-2009]

Posted by WiccaOne at 01:58 PM : Feb 20, 2009

the subject was started by Minuteman-9 --- you cannot even get facts about the posts on this story right.

[misha128-2009]

I haven''t missed a thing...these files are all over the place being used by the people trying to gather the information they need to get these people to trail, or get them sent home.

Posted by WiccaOne at 01:56 PM : Feb 20, 2009

US law prohibits people to be sent to a place that will torture then -- another of the Bush Administrations legal fallacies in their decision to admit the detainees to the US. So Gitmo is still and will forever be BUSH'S fault.

[misha128-2009]

Posted by WiccaOne at 01:54 PM : Feb 20, 2009

Parhat ruled the military tribunals inadequately addressed the Habeas Rights of the Detainees -- they did not require any evidence just innuendo like you spew -- try again

[misha128-2009]

same like Bush until the political firings in the second term.


----------------------------------
----------------------------------------
------

Posted by Misha128 at 01:27 PM : Feb 20, 2009

No, Clinton fired the attorneys for political reasons as well, to clear the decks in preparation for his many scandals....it there some reason why you excuse Clinton, but complain about Bush ? other then your obvious desire to bush-bash ?

Posted by Minuteman-9 at 01:29 PM : Feb 20, 2009

Clintons Attorney replacements were at the beginning of his first term and very very few (as in resignations) in his second -- The Bush administration has admitted to firing attorneys and the proof of political reasons is very clear for those fired during the second term. When a practice so unusual occurs there is generally a reason -- even Reagan had no similar firings to BUSH.

[misha128-2009]

Yes, I know exactly what the SCOTUS said...

Posted by WiccaOne at 01:27 PM : Feb 20, 2009

still spamming that lie -- the court said the prisoners are due a suitable Habeas proceeding and is allowing actually processing the applications through the US courts like PARHAT and DOJ with no case files that would pass muster according to the rules established in Parhat is struggling to create cases to justify the incarceration which is a far lower standard than one to convict of a crime.

[misha128-2009]

Posted by WiccaOne at 01:32 PM : Feb 20, 2009

Spam your lie as often as you wish the Parhat decision makes it clear no matter how many times you spam a lie it does not become true.

[misha128-2009]

Posted by WiccaOne at 01:30 PM : Feb 20, 2009

Missed the current news again -- Even the GITMPO Lawyers admit there are no case files for the majority of the prisoners. You also missed the Congressional testimony of DOJ claiming the excessive workload to create the non-existent files. No one can hide documents that do not exist.

[misha128-2009]

osted by misha128 at 01:17 PM : Feb 20, 2009

Is there some reason, you also discount the Geneva Convention which states that prisoner''s of war can be detained as long as the conflict or war is ongoing ? which it is ?

Posted by Minuteman-9 at 01:25 PM : Feb 20, 2009

If the had been detained in the country of capture I agree -- the choice to allow them access to the US by the Bush administration changed that and offered the detainees access to the US Legal system.

[misha128-2009]

Posted by WiccaOne at 01:27 PM : Feb 20, 2009

The tribunals are not legal the Parhat decision made that clear that the government had no evidence capable of passing legal review against many of the detainees.

[misha128-2009]

..and they are sent home.

Posted by WiccaOne at 01:21 PM : Feb 20, 2009

Deporting someone is a legal process -- The incarceration prior to that hearing can b e subject to Habeas if the process is low such as contenting the contents of an citizenship application -- happened several times for suspected WWII war criminals.

[misha128-2009]

As I may recall, didn''t the Clinton administration fire and replace all of their attorneys ? or am I wrong....no problem when they did it.

Posted by Minuteman-9 at 01:23 PM : Feb 20, 2009

Just at the beginning of the first term -- same like Bush until the political firings in the second term.

[misha128-2009]

Your attempts to posturize US law to suit your salivating over Bush trials is NONSENSE...

Posted by WiccaOne at 01:24 PM : Feb 20, 2009

Who mentiond Bush Trials about Gitmo -- you -- changing the subject when you are losing the debate is a juvenile tactic.

[misha128-2009]

will use exective privilege and state''s secrets rights, just like he''s used to law to hide every piece of paper that tracks information about him.

Posted by WiccaOne at 01:11 PM : Feb 20, 2009

Sorry wrong again -- that was BUSH

[misha128-2009]

Even the SCOTUS said you have to find another avenue other than habaes corpus to bring these terrorists trials up into US courts...

And the SCOTUS didn''t even say that until years after these terrorists were a GITMO...


Posted by WiccaOne at 01:17 PM : Feb 20, 2009

The years after is proof of Bush's unconstitutional actions -- thanks for confirming the details.

The Supreme Court said an ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURE COULD BE PROVIDED BUT UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES COULD THE RIGHT BE DENIED. Meaning that some currently available procedure or some new procedure MUST EXIST TO PREVENT DETENTION WITHOUT LEGAL REVIEW IN A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME. THE COURT HAS MADE IT VERY CLEAR THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION HAD RUN OUT THE CLOCK. This is the status the current GITMO detainees face and one Obama is moving considerably faster to fix than Bush did -- ie around 6 years of failure to provide a recognized legal process supporting ANY Habeas for the detainees.

[jgg000006]

The court decided in favor of congress based on the Constitution. No jumble speak involved or a person with a reasonable education (High School Government should be an adequate level for most to understand).

Posted by misha128

I understand that it had to do with the firing of US attorneys of which every president has the right and of which bush fired a fraction of what clinton fired.
Since it was bush's "executive priviledge" to fire as many attorneys as his little heart desired, the whole thing was a waste of time. As I said - Jumblespeak ending with "constitutional authority"

[jxknowles]

The reporting requirements outlined by the Obama Administration is a blueprint for all governments including State and Local. Most successful businesses already have this type of status report available to their employees to see how money and resources are spent.

It does take time initially and can be bogged down in detail if not reported correctly. That said, it's an absolute must to have this detail available. The major News organizations don't have the resources to provide this in any meaningful form. That's why you have so many fabrications floating around about the stimulus (example 40 million for rats) that are just plain nonsense.