The Pentagon has spent almost all of the $28.5 billion in “emergency-response” funds allocated to them by Congress in the year after the September 11th attacks. However, almost nothing is available to the public explaining how the taxpayer’s money was spent. Apparently, even confidential reports to congressional staff leave too many questions about the expenditures unanswered. In response to a national crisis Congress granted the money to the Pentagon without a full explanation of how the money would be spent. The expectation was that greater details would be forthcoming to account for the money. Most of the $28.5 billion was spent on unclassified programs, so the lack of specifics in the reports to Congress does not appear, in most cases, to be driven by security concerns. The public certainly has the right to know how so much of taxpayer money has been spent on such an important issue. However, the only publicly available document, a quarterly report to Congress, lists vague entries with huge amounts such as $4.8 billion spent for "Increased Worldwide Posture," and $1.7 billion for "Offensive Counter-terrorism." There is no detail about exactly what was actually purchased with these vast amounts. The lack of detailed information indicates a staggering lack of accountability. Congress and the public have the right and need to understand what government agencies are doing in response to the increased risk of terrorism. Unfortunately, this lack of spending information is only the most recent piece in a larger mosaic of secrecy by an administration that ignores all concerns of accountability. Since the September 11th attacks the Bush administration has used heightened concern about terrorism to increase the powers of government, decrease information and accountability, and establish questionable policies that greatly benefit certain corporations. Meanwhile efforts by Senator Jon Corzine (D-NJ) to pass legislation requiring chemical plants to evaluate and reduce risks has been stuck over concerns that it may be an imposition on companies to implement. The administration is helping to draft alternative legislation that imposes fewer requirements on corporations, possibly at the cost of security for local communities. Unfortunately, even in the post September 11th world, security matters seem to be more about the money then about safety or accountability.