Future Infrastructure budget cuts are inevitable – We must locate other means of investment to rebuild and innovate
Download 1.29 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Transperancy is key to democracy, specifically to freedom of speech and information.
- Transparency stops imperialistic governmental manipulation of the non-elite population.
K-ishTransparency TurnThe plan increases transparency in government decision-making.Rendell, 2012 The Honorable Ed Rendell, Co-Chair, Center Forward, “Building America’s Future” March 19, http://www.center-forward.org/2012/03/19/issue-point-example/ But in order for this to translate to programs at the federal level, there must be wholesale reform of the current transportation program structure. Americans are clamoring for greater accountability and transparency to ensure that scarce resources are being invested on the right projects that will bring long term economic benefits. Federal transportation policy still largely adheres to an agenda set over 50 years ago during the Eisenhower Administration. It’s time to bring bold and visionary changes to our current policies and bring our transportation policy into the 21st century. One way to bring greater accountability and transparency is to stand up a National Infrastructure Bank. A properly constructed Bank will take politics out of the decision making process and will invest in projects based on merit and help to finance critical projects of national or regional significance. Right now, if multiple states wanted to complete a project crossing multiple jurisdictions or infrastructure sectors, there is no singular place to which they can apply for financial assistance. A National Infrastructure Bank can fill that void by leveraging dollars from state and local governments as well as the private sector and subjecting all requests to a benefit-cost analysis. Clear accountability and transparency requirements would be part of the process.
Open Society Foundation, Opening government, content/uploads/2011/09/Opening-Government.pdf+Government+transperancy+boosts+justice&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShyb2Wre68McYncnaIFdIAhR9OqL6BdbUuuWu-lJNX_kpyWrUYw2uD3KlB68MWvk4k9GSNFotIHYkW4onae-5uA8iN_ftZtsx-wgOFf41rCVZjlOsi1awfls1F5Z8NSiAlwxzhK&sig=AHIEtbTcJ2ebdYevHFqBKe3KUsp_29HgEg, 2011 Openness in relation to information on governmental functioning is a crucial component of democratic governance. There are few things more abhorrent to democracies than a lack of transparency in their functioning, and secrecy in public affairs is generally a sign of autocratic rule. Such transparency is the foundation for the seeking of accountability from those who exercise power over public policy issues and governmental functioning, including not only governments but also large corporations, trade unions, civil society organisations (CSOs), funding agencies and special interest groups. This information would also include all information on private bodies that can be accessed by public authorities. Transparency helps citizens to independently evaluate governmental functioning and thus hold accountable any instances of corruption or mismanagement, whether at the level of policy formulation or at the level of implementation. Thus, the freedom of speech and expression and the right to receive information, which are seen as two sides of the same right under most international covenants, are both vitally important in ensuring transparent and accountable governance. Transparency stops imperialistic governmental manipulation of the non-elite population.de Lazari-Radek and Singer 10 Katarzyna, PhD Philosophy and lecturer at the Institute of Philosophy at Lodz University in Poland and Peter, Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University and Laureate Professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne SECRECY IN CONSEQUENTIALISM: A DEFENCE OF ESOTERIC MORALITY, 2010, www.law.nyu.edu/academics/colloquia/clppt/ECM_PRO_062727 Transparency permits open discussion and criticism of rules and policies that are being considered for implementation. To accept a morality that is only for the elite implies that we are permitted to manipulate those who are not part of the elite, in order to produce the best consequences. When we do so, we are unable to seek the opinions of those who we are manipulating on the policies we are actually implementing. This is the essence of Williams’ objection to ‘Government House utilitarianism’. We imagine the white colonial administrators sitting around in their cane armchairs under the ceiling fans, discussing how best to rule the natives. They may discuss their policies among themselves, and with the imperial government back home, but not with those who are most directly affected by them, the natives themselves. Under these circumstances they will have a tendency to convince themselves that what is in the best interests of the imperial power is the right thing to do. The danger is great that it will all go wrong because of the absence of exchange of ideas that could have happened if the policies had been transparent. Transperancy is critical to the public making informed decsions. Islam 02 Roumeen, Ph.D in International Economics and an Economic Advisor The World Bank, The Right to Tell, World Bank Institute, pg 31-32, google book Essentially, meaningful participation in democratic processes requires informed participants. Secrecy reduced the information available to the citizenry, hobbling people’s ability to participate meaningfully. Anyone who had sat on a board of directors knows that its power to exercise direction and discipline is limited by the information at its disposal. Management knows this, and often attempts to control the flow of information. We often speak of government being accountable to the people, but if effective democratic oversight is to be achieved then the voters have to be informed: they have to know what alternative actions were available and that the results might have been. Those in government typically have far more information relevant to the decisions being made than those outside government do, just as the management of a firm typically has far more information about the firm’s markets, prospects, and technology than do shareholders, let alone other outsiders. Indeed. Managers are paid to gather this information. One might argue that in a society with a free press and free institutions, little is lost by having secrecy in government; after all, other sources of relevant information are available. Indeed, recognizing the importance of information for effective governance, modern democratic societies try to protect the freedom and independence of the press and endeavor to promote independent think tanks and universities, all to provide an effective check on government. The problem is that government officials often represent the only or major source of relevant and timely information. If officials are subjected to a gag order, then the public has no real effective substitute. This is true both with respect to discussion of policy and of data (information), because much of the information that is collected is itself a public good. If the government does not provide the data, no one will or they will be supplied in insufficient quantity. Governments that are engaged in policies that have the effect of increasing inequality will not want data that show the policies’ adverse effects on inequality to become known, at least until the policies are solidly into place. Similarly, policymakers often believe that if they can establish a consensus behind a particular policy in secret, then it will be better able to withstand opposition, but that public disclosure of the direction that the consensus is taking before the consensus has been formed will create sufficient public pressure to prevent that particular consensus, or possibly any consensus from emerging. To reiterate, Openness is an essential part of public governance. Hirschman described exit and voice as instruments for discipline in organizations. For members of public organizations, that is, citizens, exit is typically not an option, and therefore greater reliance is placed on voice. In the private marketplace how a firm organizes itself- whether it keeps secrets or not- makes little difference. Customers care about its products and prices, and regardless of how the firm organizes production, if it produces good products at low prices it will succeed. Transparency issues arise of course. Firms often lack the incentive to disclose fully the attributes of their products and government, accordingly, enforced a variety of disclosure requirements for firms raising new capital publicly, and fraud laws (for a discussion of market incentives for disclosure and the need for government intervention see, for example, Grossman 1981; Stiglitz 1975a,b, 1998). Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 1.29 Mb. Share with your friends:
|