Government Performance

Feb 8, 2016

Top 400 Taxpayers See Tax Rates Rise, But There’s More to the Story

As Americans were gathering party supplies to greet the New Year, the Internal Revenue Service released their annual report of cumulative tax data reported on the 400 tax r...

read in full

Feb 4, 2016

Chlorine Bleach Plants Needlessly Endanger 63 Million Americans

Chlorine bleach plants across the U.S. put millions of Americans in danger of a chlorine gas release, a substance so toxic it has been used as a chemical weapon. Greenpeace’s new repo...

read in full

Jan 25, 2016

U.S. Industrial Facilities Reported Fewer Toxic Releases in 2014

The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data for 2014 is now available. The good news: total toxic releases by reporting facilities decreased by nearly six percent from 2013 levels. Howe...

read in full

Jan 22, 2016

Methane Causes Climate Change. Here's How the President Plans to Cut Emissions by 40-45 Percent.

UPDATE (Jan. 22, 2016): Today, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) released its proposed rule to reduce methane emissions...

read in full

more news

House Bill Calls for Agency Performance Ratings

A controversial bill that would require yet more burdensome analysis of regulatory and other government programs has resurfaced after passing the House but stalling in the Senate during the 108th Congress.

read in full

PAR Act in 108th

Download text of H.R. 3826, the version of the PAR Act that passed the House in the 108th Congress but did not ultimately make its way in the Senate, and the accompanying report H. Rep. 108-768.

read in full

Platts' Introduction of PARA

Download statement of Rep. Platts introducing PARA in 109th Congress.

read in full

H.R. 185 - Program Assessment & Results Act

Download text of the PAR Act as introduced in the 109th Congress.

read in full

GAO 2004 Study of PART

<p>Download copy of GAO, <i>Performance Budgeting: Observations on the Use of OMB's Program Assessment Rating Tool for the Fiscal Year 2004 Budget</i>, Rep. No. GAO-04-174 (Jan. 2004)

read in full

Will Privatization Increase SS Management Fees?

Dec 17, 2004 by Guest Blogger

As Paul Krugman noted in the New York Times this morning, social security overhaul comes with a lot of risks. He points out other countries have dabbled in privatization and is baffled at the lack of understanding of their experiences. For example, in Chile's program, privatization has caused management fees to be as high as 20 precent, whereas in the United States currently, 99 percent of social security revenues go towards benefits. This is another pitfall of privitization that is not mentioned by the Bush administration. Krugman's column is worth a read.

Also, click here to read the latest Center on Budget and Policy Priorities report about price indexing and how Bush's reform proposal could significantly reduce benefits in the years to come.

read in full

Everything You Want To Know About Social Security And More

Dec 16, 2004 by Guest Blogger

The Social Security Network, which was first launched in 1997, serves as an important resource for information and research on the Social Security program and the debate about its future. This week they released "Twelve Reasons Why Privatizing Social Security Is A Bad Idea." The report highlights the fact that the creation of personal investment accounts will have drastic consequences on federal revenue reserves, future retirees, and the people who rely on social security benefits the most. The report also includes numerous links to other studies of social security policy.

For an additional analysis of the social security safety net and the implications of reform, check out this article from tompaine.com.

read in full

Bush Won't Raise Payroll Tax To Fund Social Security Changes

Dec 10, 2004 by Guest Blogger

President Bush made clear yesterday his opposition to raising payroll taxes in order to fund potential changes to social security. A payroll tax is a percentage of an individual's salary that goes into social security and medicare funds. The percentage paid into those funds is matched by employers, in order to raise adequate revenue for these entitlement programs.

While this administration is seriously looking into reforming social security -- an anti-poverty program which was implemented during the New Deal -- they have yet to explain how they will pay for this overhaul, which could cost anywhere from $1 - $2 trillion in transfer costs alone. On top of this, the administration has pledged to cut the deficit in half by 2009, and keep the first term tax cuts in place. Raising payroll taxes could help pay for social security overhaul, and even though the policy appears to have bipartisan support in Congress, the President has ruled it out as an option.

The fact that this administration is unwilling to look into raising payroll taxes means that they are more likely to look into increased borrowing or non-defense discretionary budget cuts to help stabilize the economy. In an article in today's Washington Post, Congressman Robert Matsui (D-CA) is quoted as saying, "I fear this means the administration will employ sham accounting gimmicks in an attempt to hide the true costs of their privatization schemes. Ultimately, hiding the truth about benefit cuts or fleecing the public on massive borrowing would have a disastrous effect on the economy, not to mention betray the trust of the American people."

read in full

Spending Bill Highlights

Dec 3, 2004 by Adam Hughes*

Although the FY2005 spending bill won't officially be passed by Congress or signed by the President for a few more days, the bill is pretty much complete. For good highlights and assessments of the bill, check out the following two sources:

Senate Republican Policy Committee Summary
House Appropriations Committee Press Release

For the latest information on the tax return provision included in the spending bill, check out this Washington Post article.

read in full

Spending Bill Will Remain On Hold Through Early December

Nov 29, 2004 by Guest Blogger

Although it was passed by both houses of Congress last weekend, the FY2005 spending bill will remain on hold and will not go to the President for a signature just yet. Problems arose last week when Senate staffers discovered that the omnibus spending bill included a tax-return provision that shouldn't have been in there. The provision, if passed, would have given appropriators and their "agents" unprecedented access U.S. taxpayers' returns.

Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers supported removing this provision from the omnibus spending bill, however a correcting resolution won't be passed until the House and Senate reconvene on December 6th and 7th, respectively, to fix the controversial rider. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) made it clear that Democrats would not give unanimous consent to make the change on a voice vote, so the omnibus is pending until lawmakers return for a second lame-duck session. Pelosi argued that this extra time will give lawmakers a chance to read the bill, so that they know exactly what they are passing. Congress passed a continuing resolution to fund the government while the omnibus pends; it expires December 8th.

It is clear that flaws in the budget process are responsible for this mess. Not only are nine of the thirteen appropriations bills being passed almost two months after the end of the fiscal year, but a highly detrimental provision almost slipped throught the cracks of a bill that is thousands and thousands of pages long. When lawmakers and their aides are given the opportunity to slip these types of riders and provisions into massive, must-pass legislation, it is not surprising that situations such as this arise. For more information on this issue click here and here.

read in full