The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities published a fantastic, in-depth report this month examining the state of disclosure of state level tax expenditures. The report reviews the best (OR, MN, and CT) and worst (AR, MD, and RI) state reports and outlines the best practices for the ideal tax expenditure disclosure. CBPP makes a strong case that increased disclosure of tax expenditure data by states would improve policies and accountability:

If properly designed and implemented, a tax expenditure report makes tax expenditures more transparent by telling policymakers and the public how the state is spending its money and what it is accomplishing through those expenditures. A tax expenditure report also encourages accountability by enabling policymakers and voters to evaluate individual tax expenditures and decide whether to continue them. In addition, a tax expenditure report saves money by enabling policymakers to monitor the costs of tax expenditures and rein in their cost if necessary.

On April 9 I introduced the need for improving the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) and suggested three broad paths for achieving this. Here I discuss one path – expanding information. We always want more information. And for a while TRI was a program regularly searching for new data to report with new industries being added, new chemicals, lowering the threshold for some chemicals, and adding federal facilities. But recently we have gone backwards with an effort by the agency to raise the reporting thresholds and have fewer detailed reports filed.

Recently the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) invited me to speak at the National TRI Conference about my ideas for where the new administration might take the Toxic Releases Inventory (TRI) program. I thought some people who missed the conference might be interested in the ideas so I’m posting them here in a series of blog posts.

Earmarks has become the new four letter word in Congress of late, with most members rhetorically castigating earmarks while quietly slipping in earmark requests for funding in their districts to committee staff, in conference reports of bills, and anyplace else they can stick them.