The Sunshine Caucus

The Democratic Party's sweep in November was due in no small part to its promise to clean up Washington. For those turned off by the K Street "politics as usual" deforming our democracy check out a new initiative by the Sunlight Foundation – a nonpartisan organization dedicated to using technology to achieve greater openness between members of Congress and their constituents. Urging all Representatives to post their daily schedules online is a good step towards some much-needed transparency.

So far only two freshmen, Representative Kirsten Gillibrand and Senator Jon Tester, are heeding the call. Every day Tester reveals each lobbyist, constituent, and colleague he meets with--as well as the duration of the meeting. Gillibrand identifies meeting participants. (In order to address safety concerns schedules are posted the next day. Also, items pertaining to national security are omitted.)

"I believe in transparent government and this is my effort," Tester told the Washington Post.

"This is about ethics reform, letting people know who's bending your ear," said Gillibrand.

Ellen Miller, Executive Director of the Sunlight Foundation, agrees. "This isn't ‘gotcha' politics. But a positive way to respond to public cynicism about Congress. This openness will breed more trust between members and their constituents."

But for all of the conversation about greater transparency, Miller says that resistance to the initiative by most members of Congress is "rather surprising." The most common concern expressed is that opponents will use information as ammunition in the next cycle. For example, if a Congressman met with a timber industry lobbyist on an issue, it could be taken out of context even if there were three meetings with the Sierra Club on the same issue. (Miller notes that representatives should want the public to know that they are meeting with people on all sides of any given issue). That probably explains why one Democrat close to Gillibrand told the New York Times, "There are a lot of people who think she's crazy to do [this]. But she really believes in it."

The Sunlight Foundation is also working on "three modest proposals" which complement this reform effort, including: ensuring that all currently required public reports are made available online; putting an end to secret legislation by requiring that all earmarks, amendments, and bills are identified with the proposing member's name; and meaningful lobbyist disclosure such as financial contributions, legislation discussions, and relationships with members or staff members. Meanwhile, the Foundation is laying the groundwork for a major push in the next few months for constituents to call on their members to join Gillibrand and Tester in posting their schedules online.

Gillibrand is certainly ready to welcome her colleagues.

According to the Post she wants "to create a special caucus of like-minded members" she calls "the Sunshine Caucus." Together, they can work towards a Sunlight Government defined by real transparency and ethics reform.

Comments (19)

1. Well, let's see....

   Speaker Nancy put William "$90K in the cooler" Jefferson on the House Homeland Security Committee....so....

   I'm thinking not.

   Posted by Mask at 02/22/2007 @ 10:47am

2. 2 out of 535 ain't bad. Its a start...

   Posted by bjkron at 02/22/2007 @ 10:48am

3. Posted by MASK 02/22/2007 @ 10:47am | ignore this person

   has Jefferson been charged with anything? has he been convicted of anything? where is that famous presumption of innocence I have heard so much about?

   Posted by johannesrolf at 02/22/2007 @ 11:09am

4. "The most common concern expressed is that opponents will use information as ammunition in the next cycle."

   GOOD GRIEF. THIS IS IT IN A NUTSHELL AND SUCCINCTLY SUMMARIZES WHY WE DO INDEED MORE SUNSHINE.

   Posted by OneVote at 02/22/2007 @ 11:24am

5. I have my doubts about jefferson, who has not been indicted for anything.

   Posted by johannesrolf at 02/22/2007 @ 12:17pm

6. certainly not , I would have him shot on the merest shadow of suspicion. howzat?

   Posted by johannesrolf at 02/22/2007 @ 12:33pm

7. Jefferson is actually a little off topic here, but since the conversation is going that way...Why blame Pelosi for putting him on any committee? He was legally elected. He must be appointed to serve on house committees. Pelosi has ensured that he is not chairing the ethics committee, or any other committee for that matter. Seems MASK and LVLIBERTY1 are really upset that the voters elected Jefferson, and since they can't dispute that vote, they want to make it a Pelosi issue. To them I have 2 sugestions: 1) back off and wait for a real issue to vent about, and 2) don't worry, there will be plenty of legitimate issues to vent about soon enough...after all politics are politics.

   Posted by noparty at 02/22/2007 @ 12:59pm

8. Posted by NOPARTY 02/22/2007 @ 12:59am

   Gee, NP....nobody on the Left "upset" that Delay was re-elected in 2004?....or Duke Cunningham?

   Please. Let's not get into a Hypocrisy War here, huh?

   Posted by Mask at 02/22/2007 @ 3:05pm

9. "The Democratic Party's sweep in November was due in no small part to its promise to clean up Washington. "

   Is that what happened in Nov?

   You think they(dems) can be swept out as easily or was their sweep huge?

   Posted by john maasch at 02/22/2007 @ 3:36pm

10. Here is a fairy tale that could use a little sunshine. All characters are fictional, and any resemblance to actual persons is purely coincidental. Not sure how it ends....

    Once upon a time in a great land not so very far away, there lived a people who were ruled by competing creatures who lived in the waters of dark and dirty swamps so the people could not see. One set of creatures lived in the Blue Swamp and the other lived in the Red Swamp. Both Blue Swamp creatures and Red Swamp creatures drew their sustenance and power from the peoples' sacrifice and tribute, but gave little in return. Blue Swamp creatures hated Red Swamp creatures and Red Swamp creatures hated Blue Swamp creatures because they each vied to have the peoples' tribute in treasure for their very own.

    Over the ages, Red Swamp creatures would be more powerful and dominant over Blue Swamp creatures, and in turn, and at other times, Blue Swamp creatures would be more powerful and dominant over Red Swamp creatures. The people, as always, were caught in the middle land between the Blue Swamp and the Red Swamp, and the people had to pay their tribute to both. Red Swamp creatures proclaimed that they were the rulers that were best for the people and Blue Swamp creatures in the same manner proclaimed that they were the best for the people. Despite the proclamations of the Red and Blue Swamp creatures, the people suffered and were impoverished by their competing rulers. Despite their suffering and impoverishment, the people remained hopeful that there would come a day when the yoke of rule of the Red Swamp and the Blue Swamp would be lifted.

    One day, and at a time when the Red Swamp rulers were most powerful and dominant, a ruler of rulers from the Blue Swamp named Nancy devised a brilliant plan to unseat the Red Swamp rulers from their mighty throne. Nancy, from the dark and dirty waters of the Blue Swamp, summoned the people to the edge of the water and said unto them; "If you only support the rulers from the Blue Swamp, I promise you that I as their leader will drain for evermore the waters of the Red Swamp, and the rulers of the Red Swamp will surely perish in the light of day." Nancy, magnanimously and with convincing righteousness proclaimed, "I promise a New Day to all the people if Blue Swamp rulers are restored to power and dominance. I proclaim to all the people of the land that Blue Swamp rulers will work for the will and good of the people. I further profess that Blue Swamp rulers are good and just and that all our former promises to the people left unfulfilled were frustrated by the cunning subterfuge of the Red Swamp rulers, and that that is the only reason that they were not fulfilled, so help me Most Divine Eternal Creature of the Blue Swamp."

    The people were overjoyed and exclaimed; "At last, beneficent ruler of rulers Nancy will lead us from oppression and drain the swamp of our oppressors." And so it came to pass that the people did support rulers of the Blue Swamp, and with the support of the people the rulers of the Blue Swamp won power and dominance over the Red Swamp and the people. There was much celebration in the Blue Swamp and throughout the land. "A New Day at last is upon us," was heard from the mouths of the people all over the land.

    The people anxiously and expectantly waited in joyous anticipation for now supreme ruler of rulers Nancy to drain the Red Swamp and expose it to the light of day as she had promised. But this was not to be. Supreme ruler of rulers Nancy told the people, "We have more important matters before us than the draining of swamps. Let us unite with our brother and sister rulers of the Red Swamp, and not be torn apart by divisiveness that will only distract us from important matters at hand."

    The people were aghast. "How could we be so naïve and betrayed," they exclaimed. An overwhelming sadness engulfed the land of the people. But supreme ruler of rulers Nancy was not done. Supreme ruler of rulers Nancy said unto the people from the waters of the Blue Swamp, "If you will now support rulers of the Blue Swamp in their quest to crown a king or queen over the land for all time, then you can trust our exalted king or queen to be to make sure that our brother and sister creatures of the Red Swamp will rule the land nevermore and will be relegated to the prison of the dark and dirty waters of the Red Swamp which I have decided not to drain -- for the good of the people. "What say you our beloved people of the land;" supreme ruler of rulers Nancy beseeched?

    The people of the land were bewildered and pondered supreme ruler of rulers Nancy's pronouncement. They………..

    Posted by OneVote at 02/22/2007 @ 4:38pm

11. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 02/22/2007 @ 3:36pm

    Didn't Ms vanden Huevel post an article after the November midterms and say the victory was due to "demands for economic justice"!?!?!?

    Posted by Mask at 02/22/2007 @ 4:38pm

12. ""The Democratic Party's sweep in November was due in no small part to its promise to clean up Washington. " Is that what happened in Nov? You think they(dems) can be swept out as easily or was their sweep huge? Posted by JOHN MAASCH 02/22/2007 @ 3:36pm | " You'd think that when you got your ass thoroughly waxed MAASH, you'd lie low about it.

    Posted by brantl at 02/22/2007 @ 5:07pm

13. Posted by MASK 02/22/2007 @ 4:38pm | ignore this person

    Ya got a cite on the article on election sweep due to demands of economic justice? I gots to know as the dude in Dirty Harry said.

    Saw this tidbit:

    "BLOG | Posted 01/07/2007 @ 8:26pm Pelosi--Mother, Grandmother, Speaker

    PERMALINK SEE ALL POSTS EMAIL THIS POST COMMENTS (155)

    Did you see the New York Times page one photo of newly-elected House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, gavel in hand, celebrating the start of the 110th Congress surrounded by a swarm of her grandchildren as well as other Congressional members' offspring? What did you think when you saw it?

    I'm still sorting out my feelings--but I feel conflicted.

    I wonder why Pelosi, a woman I admire, seemed so keen to use her first day as Speaker to portray herself as a traditional, family-first kind of woman?"

    I think KVH is justified in feeling conflicted but not about Pelosi's romper room if ya know what I mean.

    Posted by OneVote at 02/22/2007 @ 7:00pm

14. Well, OV...could only do a little research, and TRUE...couldn't find "economic justice" (atleast from Ms vH...plenty of other refs)...but found these three....none of which are "transparency in government"...

    BLOG | Posted 11/10/2006 @ 02:41am Sweet Victories on a Sweet Night

    "These were some of the victories. There were also many candidates who were right on the issues but came up short at the ballot box. Nevertheless, each played a key role in collectively focusing the national conversation on the war, the economy and the GOP's unrelenting assault on our constitution. Their contributions will be felt long past Election Day."

    Now, the inevitable "Well, just because she didn't mention it THERE, doesn't mean it wasn't an important issue"....fine.

    Then...Terri Schiavo and not funding a manned Mars mission were "key roles"....I can't prove it, but....hehe

    Posted by Mask at 02/22/2007 @ 8:34pm

15. Posted by MASK 02/22/2007 @ 8:34pm | ignore this person

    Thanks for looking. I'll be sure to take a look at what you referenced.

    I'll be doing some homework!

    Posted by OneVote at 02/22/2007 @ 9:24pm

16. Brandl,

    I don't think what happened to me was an ass waxing, but the firing of the Repubs was justified in my opinion...just as the firing of the Dems in 08 will be more than justified, based on their far left leadeship..farther left than even the dem population as a whole....which should get them fired in 08, but one never really knows.....

    Now an ass waxing....I think the victory in 08 for the dems was less than 1% margin, but a victory just the same...

    to find an example of ass waxing ...you might look to Carter, Mondale, even the 94 congressional waxing Clintons White House endured....

    Posted by john maasch at 02/23/2007 @ 12:07am

17. "has Jefferson been charged with anything? has he been convicted of anything? where is that famous presumption of innocence I have heard so much about?

    Posted by JOHANNESROLF 02/22/2007 @ 11:09am |

    Neither has Cheney, but you would never know it from reading here...

    Posted by john maasch at 02/23/2007 @ 09:42am

18. Posted by MASK 02/22/2007 @ 8:34pm | ignore this person

    BLOG | Posted 11/10/2006 @ 02:41am Sweet Victories on a Sweet Night

    "Now, the inevitable "Well, just because she didn't mention it THERE, doesn't mean it wasn't an important issue"....fine."

    This is a bit of stretch Mask. But I agree with you that it would have been worthy of mention that this was a factor.

    As I recall, that "Thirty Something" group that includes young DEM representatives were right up there on there on stage with Pelosi and Emmanuel on Sweet Victories Night. Thirty Something group railed continuously on culture of corruption and on how they were going to clean it up. Seems to me, that if they were front and center with Pelosi on Sweet Victories Night, the promise to clean up "culture of corruption" so eloquently echoed by Pelosi would have been worthy of mention. Premeditated omission of facts? Not conclusive. Missing the boat on an important issue that should have been in her article....definitely.

    Posted by OneVote at 02/23/2007 @ 10:42am

19. Maasch, there is really no way Jefferson and Cheney can be compared. one is possibly corrupt, another could be a war criminal of the highest order. check Nuremberg war tribunals.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 02/23/2007 @ 10:44am