LegiStorm's Blog > Hysteria over personal financial disclosures

Hysteria over personal financial disclosures

Posted by LegiStorm on Thursday, April 03, 2008

The House has worked itself up into hysteria over LegiStorm’s recent release of staffer personal financial disclosures. There are demands in Congress for a taxpayer-financed lawsuit against us. http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/aides-private-info-exposed-2008-04-02.html

One House staffer has even gone so far as to suggest that LegiStorm aided and abetted in the burglary of his house. This has gone too far.

We have a solution for the mess of the House’s own making. First, to be clear:

- The U.S. Congress wrote the law that requires disclosure of personal finances to aid in the fight against public corruption.

- Congressional staffers were the ones who voluntarily filed what they did in their personal financial disclosures. In a handful of disclosures, a tiny fraction of the total, staffers included unnecessary personal details like investment account numbers and children names. Their signature is the only detail that they now most complain about that is required.

- The Congress made these documents public. It did so after a one-month review process that concluded, apparently, that nothing was wrong with their disclosure.

- Neither the House nor the Senate require any form of identification to access this information. Anybody can access it without talking to a single person and by simply entering a fake name into a computer.

- We have voluntarily gone to significant lengths and costs already to scrub the most sensitive of information released due to staffer slipups and ethics committee oversight. This includes investment account numbers and Social Security numbers. We did so without delay.

- We have voluntarily provided various security measures such as user registration and authentication, a legal warning (one that is not present on two other heavily trafficked web sites that have for years provided member of Congress disclosures), and a human response system to make sure that automated bots cannot access the data.

All these measures by us that are not legally required present an enormous burden for us as a company that for all intents and purposes has no existing revenue stream (our advertising on our entire site brings in less than $10 a day despite the notion by some staffers that we are raking in lots of money from the public service of releasing this data free to all users). And now House chiefs of staff want us to review thousands of individual filings to redact more things that they voluntarily put into the public record and are in most cases readily available from other public sources, including the telephone book?

There are three ready solutions if the House is genuine about its desire to protect staffers.

1) The House will make minor changes to the financial disclosure form so that the signature and address of staffers is disclosed only to the House and is not released publicly.

2) The House will review these forms for inadvertent disclosures.

3) The House should pay – only out-of-pocket costs, with no overhead or profit – for us to redact the past disclosures to their liking, assuming the redactions have no significant public disclosure consequences.

This solution would certainly save the taxpayers over the alternative of the House foolishly bringing the frivolous lawsuit that many chiefs of staff appear to demand.

posted in litigation, personal financial disclosures, The Hill

Flag comment as inappropriate

60 comments so far

Thank you!

Posted by Bryan on 04/19/2008 06:57 PM EDT

James, You seem to be mistaken. There is a clear distinction between those of us who work in the private sector versus those of us who work in the public sector. If my tax dollars are paying for your salary or a congressman's salary, we have the right to know certain pieces of information about you. If I am in the private sector and my income comes from my employers' pre-tax income, then s/he has a right to know if I am conflicted and not the general public. Having said all of this, as someone who works in a highly regulated industry, there are certain pieces of information about me which are required by law to be publicly available. Knowing this, I choose to continue working in this industry. This is the same choice you face. As Eddie Murphy's father said, "If you don't like, then get the **** out."

Posted by James on 04/14/2008 02:09 PM EDT

Having the right to do something, and doing it are two different things. Posting information in the manner and tone you do will drive away people like me from doing the work at the pay level you demand of us. (For the record I am not a staffer, nor have I been, but work in the field and would like to contribute to my country at some point.) If consumer groups demanded to know what investments you the secretary or line worker have in order to determine if the product you produce is good or bad, you'd be opposed to it. Don't I have the right to know that you invest in an oil company if you work for a firm that creates alternatives to fossil fuels? Isn't that a conflict of interest? Or if your husband works for Greenpeace shouldn't that make us wonder if you aren't in a conflict of interest if you work for Exxon? Especially if a site posted it like this for anyone to see. As a consumer/investor etc. don't you think then I have the right to YOUR personal info for any job you work on because I might find some reason to question your product or ethics. Ask yourself if you'd want to endure this and if not, ask yourself what kind of person would and is that the only kind of person you want doing the hard work of government?

Posted by droidboy010101 on 04/10/2008 09:20 PM EDT

"Great. Let's do this for all the nonprofit organizations as well!" They do, it's called auditing and disclosure laws that all non-profits submit to at the end of their fiscal years. So already done: so how does that pertain to the problem of how the law was written or how that law has been enacted? And how people now want to sue for something their organization enacted? Just fix the problem and go from there.

Posted by Gina Pera on 04/10/2008 02:25 PM EDT

Wow, they make a big fuss about bringing Democracy elsewhere but try to practice it here? How dare you! BRILLIANT BRILLIANT BRILLIANT WORK! THANK YOU!!! Gina

Posted by RStar23 on 04/10/2008 12:19 AM EDT

"I am a former Congressional staff member whose information is posted on the internet. And I will admit that I feel that it has been an invasion of privacy to some extent." Sorry you feel that way but DC staffers are paid by the taxpayers and we have a right to know how much we are paying you. If that is an invasion of your privacy, too darned bad.

Posted by RStar23 on 04/10/2008 12:15 AM EDT

What these staffers and their politician bosses seem to forget is that WE THE TAXPAYERS pay their salaries and WE THE TAXPAYERS have a right to know how much WE THE TAXPAYERS are paying our employees. Since most of us are working or going to school or raising families and do not have the time to trek to DC to manually look up this data, it seems only proper that the data be made available to us through the Internet. So DC Staffers - if you don't like it, quit and get a real job.

Posted by Rick in Michigan on 04/09/2008 11:42 PM EDT

Gosh, the anon ex staffer has to work till the job is done. Late nights, weekends, missed vacations. I say that's good training for working in the real world like the rest of us out here in flyover country. I've had to deal with staffers and other bureaucrats who are supposed to help us inadequate civilians as we actually try to accomplish good things in our communities that they put up roadblocks and obstruct in the name of power and party. Shine all the light you can on these folks. They can't stand the light of day.

Posted by Indiana on 04/09/2008 11:29 PM EDT

Recently I contacted my US Congressman and Senators about the ripoff I felt I received from a mortgage company. None of them replied. I then called their office a couple of months later--their aides spoke to me for over thirty minutes, but I never even received a letter of acknowledgment of the phone call. They apparently aren't concerned about ethical behavior of the big mortgage lenders and banks or about their constituents credit ratings. Why should I support protecting their personal information or credit ratings? I know they all receive great health insurance and big bucks for their civil service.

Posted by dan on 04/09/2008 09:31 PM EDT

You guys are great. We have Waxman demanding to know the income of employees of private companies. Feds constantly loosing computers and private information its high time the shoe's on the other foot. Hopefully the next reform will require Congress to give exact information rather than a rough guesstament. Ohhh Waxman you harvest what you sow

Posted by anonymous on 04/09/2008 09:24 PM EDT

I am a former Congressional staff member whose information is posted on the internet. And I will admit that I feel that it has been an invasion of privacy to some extent. What bothers me more, however, are the nasty comments about hill staff. To the person who wants a job in the cloakroom, go ahead and send your resume. Do you know anything about House or Senate procedure? Are you willing to work until the Senate or House goes out of session, which on any given day can be until they decide to finish? As a case in point, during the budget, the Senate was in until 2:30 in the morning. The cloakroom staff probably had enough time to go home (if lucky) to take a shower. And to the person who suggested Hill staff go back to the private sector, where they will be judged by their "abilities" send your resume for a chief of staff, leg director, committee staffer or any other number of postions. Be grilled by Members of Congress at hearings and mark-ups. Really, try it for one day. Don't get me wrong, I am not complaining -- I am grateful for the opportunity to serve on Committee staff. I worked all night, on weekends, missed vacations, and numerous events with family. Follow a Hill staffer around for one day - then make an informed point.

Posted by anonymous on 04/09/2008 07:18 PM EDT

Looks like everyone has pretty much covered it all below. Of course with the exception of those who have something to hide and are outraged. Let's hope you don't get shut down. Will be interesting to see what happens...

Posted by anonymous on 04/09/2008 07:01 PM EDT

THE LIGHT OF DAY AFTER THE LONG NIGHT IS A BEAUTIFUL EVENT

Posted by Michael on 04/09/2008 06:40 PM EDT

Bravo Legistorm! I serve this great country of ours with pride. I have read the article from Capital Hill, your reply and the comments dealing with this issue. Beating the dead horse, Legistorm has done nothing wrong in discosing PUBLIC (see dictionary.com for definition) information. For the person posting as anonymous(Posted by anonymous at 05:43 PM EDT on Wednesday, April 09, 2008), I am glad that you are excercising your right to free speech that I help to protect, but please keep in mind one thing. Even with the rights we are Constitutionaly guaranteed, you making statements like: "A CEO’s on the books wages that make 500x the average wage is obscene and not remotely justified. None of them can walk on water nor have they cured AIDS or cancer. Add their hidden wages that defer income taxes altogether and it is all the more obscene." After reading this I have to ask, what is the price of tea in China? Answer: who cares. What does a private company have to do with the law that financial records FROM the government is to be public. you have the right to say what you want, but please stay on topic.One other thing, become familiar with "relevence" (see dictionary.com for definition). HOOYA

Posted by InRussetShadows on 04/09/2008 06:32 PM EDT

Someone needs to archive this site and FAST before our overlords in DC decide what's best for us.

Posted by Robert, Texas on 04/09/2008 06:14 PM EDT

Interesting how legislators are concerned about their own privacy and their own personal information, meanwhile we have cameras on every street corner, GPS tracking devices in our phones and cars and now our own personal medical information (not to mention our DNA and everything else)is available to anyone in government that thinks they have a need to know. I'm getting kind of tired of the one way street and their making laws that only apply to them and not us mere mortals. Everyone needs to wake up and hold our legislators accountable. This is just One privacy issue among many. How about what websites you go to and the things you buy and the music you listen to and the books you read or buy. Good work keep it up. How about publishing their home phone numbers so anyone and everyone can call them at home during dinner time ?

Posted by anonymous on 04/09/2008 05:43 PM EDT

RE: Posted by anonymous at 04:27 PM EDT on Wednesday, April 09, 2008 I am not upset about $1 million for an entire staff; however, the CEO analogy does not make your case very well. A CEO’s on the books wages that make 500x the average wage is obscene and not remotely justified. None of them can walk on water nor have they cured AIDS or cancer. Add their hidden wages that defer income taxes altogether and it is all the more obscene. While I support the notion that public servants and government employees should and must have their wages and financial connections disclosed to the public and that private individuals should and must be protected from such information collected and kept on them, I would also make an exception in the case of powerful CEOs and corporate officers who have far too easy access and influence as compared to average people, to policy and lawmakers. They are the ultimate lobbying force.

Posted by Clinton Brown on 04/09/2008 05:40 PM EDT

I work overseas pushing for increased government transparency and accountability in countries that suffer from corruption and poor governance. Congress should be applauded for passing the legislation to make this possible (we can tout it as a model); LegiStorm should be applauded for making it more accessible to the public. There is no need to beat up on the staffers. They work hard, and no one likes to have their privacy infringed upon (even if it's the right thing). While we're at it, how about putting a name. Seems a bit ironic that posters applauding transparency and accountability continue to post as "anonymous" doesn't it?

Posted by droidboy010101 on 04/09/2008 05:23 PM EDT

"Excellent grammar in Legistorm's lead sentence: "worked itself up into hysteria"" Usually, when someone starts an internet comment mewling about grammar, that's a great indication that they've got nothing. Even more so when they comment on someone's name (showing a wee bit anti-caledonian bigotry with mocking the name Jock, anony? Want a Glesgie kiss, eh Jimmy? Uhhem, sorry, fell down to your level there. Felt a need to stick my heid in ye.) And as far as all those poor issues that'll be missed in dealing with the bed Congress has made for itself, I know one that will not be: HOW PERSONAL INFORMATION IS DISTRIBUTED AND USED IN THIS COUNTRY. The general cavalier manner in which Congress has dealt with this issue has final come home to roost. Maybe we'll see a little more attention to how the rest of our private details are passed about... All rancor aside though. There is a solution, and it's not a lawsuit - do your homework and find a way to comply with the law w/o divulging kid's names (because nepotism never happens) or SSN's. Congress published it... go back to the word document in which the form appear and tinker with it. Problem solved. Anti-Scottish commentary will not be necessary in the future.

Posted by josh on 04/09/2008 05:09 PM EDT

This is perfect. It is one of the best applications of the First Amendment I have seen in a long time. Why can't this same transparency apply to the legislative actions of the members of Congress, especially vis a vis earmarks?

Posted by anonymous on 04/09/2008 05:07 PM EDT

These are all government employees and they are public servants. We the people have a right to know what we pay our employees. Indeed, given their close proximity and potential to influence policy and lawmakers we have a material interest in disclosure of where their personal financial loyalties are as well, where they are invested and who gives them gifts, trips, junkets, etc. of any and all kinds, less from family members. However, it is very interesting that now that the shoe in on the other foot they should concern themselves with data collected and disseminated about them. Where have any of them been on the issue of data mining and consolidating every conceivable detail of our private lives, whom are not government employees or public servants, for profiling by both government and private corporate interests? There is no justification for collecting or keeping data on private individuals by government, less probable cause and a warrant under Oath, or business, less a specific and legitimate contractual interest and that is specifically material to that contractual interest and not obtained or held without both prior knowledge and consent. It should otherwise be made a felony to possess any personal and private information on any individuals. Frankly, I don’t want an employer to know how I register to vote, to have any access to my medical records I do not choose to disclose and when, or any personal information that is not directly related to the specific tasks of the job or for payroll purposes.

Posted by anonymous on 04/09/2008 04:27 PM EDT

As the name implies, I was one of those Hill staffers. Senate Environment and Public Works anda couple of individual senators at different times. The disclosure of home addresses strikes me as a troublesome idea, and obviously some dummies put their SS #s and bank account #s where they shouldn't, but that's not this site's fault. The rest of it -- well, tough, go work downtown if you don't like the terms under which The People offer you employment. I was heavily involved in the key policy debates that steered the directions of major environmental laws. Of COURSE we should be able to scrutinize whether people in positions like the ones I held are taking favors from interest groups. On the other hand, some of the comments here are stupid, cruel, and presumptuous about hard-working Hill staff. Members of the House and Senate aren't dumb clucks -- the workload is awful; they need smart, motivated staff. Someone is outraged by $1 million a year for an entire House office staff -- Oh, grow up! There are are hundreds of corporate CEOs who individually pull down that much a month, and do you think we don't pay for that in the price of what they sell? And $100k a year isn't bad, but it's hardly a "massive" salary in Washington in this day and age. Who do you want in those legislative jobs -- stupid people or corporate moles or the major-law-school graduates and PhDs in science and policy I worked with?

Posted by David on 04/09/2008 04:03 PM EDT

This is an excellent thing you are doing. Keep up the good work!

Posted by DavidDee on 04/09/2008 03:47 PM EDT

Why so many trips to Israel? http://www.legistorm.com/trip_browse_by_destination_country/index/page/1/sort/cost/type/desc.html

Posted by anonymous on 04/09/2008 03:39 PM EDT

Excellent grammar in Legistorm's lead sentence: "worked itself up into hysteria" Aye. Not to stereotype, but I can't stop myself, especially after learning the team is led by a man named, Jock. I would guess the typical Legistorm staffer is 20 something, male, grew up privileged and has difficulty taming his (token her?) ego. I work in the private sector, but I would guess that genuine "hysteria" on the Hill would more likely be driven by heated debate around energy, telecom, war funding, etc. issues. Now this firm is distracting impacted members and staffers from their real work, and, I am quite sure, satisfactorily satiating their own egos. Does the public benefit? Does this do the public good? No.

Posted by Craig Far - State Director on 04/09/2008 03:29 PM EDT

Great. Let's do this for all the nonprofit organizations as well!

Posted by Madison on 04/09/2008 03:22 PM EDT

Chickens are coming home to roost and roast. The government spying and retaliation initiatives that has been taking place to support corruption is not a one way street. You’re privacy is going bye bye as well & with it maybe some jail time. You had better buy this company out – fast.

Posted by anonymous on 04/09/2008 03:13 PM EDT

I'm a lawyer. I'm a former Congressional staffer. My name is on here. I see absolutely no basis for suing Legistorm for doing something that they have a legal right to do. Congress made it public. If Congress made it public, you can republish and discuss it. There's that pesky First Amendment that keeps popping up whenever the cockroaches don't like the light shone on them.

Posted by anonymous on 04/09/2008 03:06 PM EDT

why do they get to know where we live but we can't know where they live?

Posted by anonymous on 04/09/2008 02:55 PM EDT

All public records should be on internet accessible databases. Why stop at sex offender "scarlet letter" lists, municipal and common pleas court records including divorce cases, property transactions on county recorder sites, voter registration files, congressional staffer disclosures, etc.. If it is public record, everyone should be able to know about it. No one should be able to hide, no one should be able to rebuild a reputation. Show it all!

Posted by me on 04/09/2008 01:43 PM EDT

I noticed that some staffers are drawing salaries from two job titles during the same time frame. For example, on Jefferson's staff (LA). Has anybody noticed a way to drill down and determine if there was an start date for the salaries? I.E. did the person get a promotion during the time frame, or is there something odd actually going on?

Posted by ronald on 04/09/2008 01:22 PM EDT

Only a matter of time before AIPAC shuts you down. Guaranteed.

Posted by AL CAL on 04/09/2008 01:13 PM EDT

Keep the light shining and keep up the good work. The more government is required to operate in the open the more responsive it will be to the will of the people.

Posted by Bring on the Lawyers! on 04/09/2008 12:51 PM EDT

Yes, lawyers are needed, but not to sue LegiStorm. Lawyers are needed to sue the legislative management who so misused taxpayers' money. Seems like pigging out at the congressional trough is a way of life. Where is Speaker Pelosi when you need her? Is she aware of all the greed, graft, and corruption under her? What does she know, and when did she first know it?

Posted by Average American on 04/09/2008 12:44 PM EDT

Wow, can I get a job in the Capitol cloak room?

Posted by Mike on 04/09/2008 12:00 PM EDT

Nice to see the insiders squirm now that they are subjected to the same scrutiny as the rest of us. Why are they upset - does "the lady protest too much" one has to wonder, and why. More transparency is a great thing and good for you to bring this out of the closet. Makes interesting reading.

Posted by RHOmea on 04/09/2008 11:39 AM EDT

BRAVO!!! Now - Can you work on the Pentagon budget next PLEASE??!?!?

Posted by anonymous on 04/09/2008 11:34 AM EDT

Wow. This website will now be a daily stop for me. Washingtonians have for way too long lived under different rules than the rest of us. In a million years I could not give a $2,000 shotgun (or whatever) to a client without coming under government scrutiny -- but our congressmen are allowed while receiving donations from that same client. I hope this website becomes as big as Drudge.

Posted by Doug on 04/09/2008 11:25 AM EDT

Keep it up. America badly needs this kind of disclosure.

Posted by C C on 04/09/2008 10:58 AM EDT

Keep up the great work!!! Love it, love it, love it!!! We taxpayers have a right to know how our hard earned money is being used...often wasted!!!

Posted by LibertyNews on 04/09/2008 10:38 AM EDT

Keep up the good work guys! It sure is fun to watch how much they squirm when their activities are revealed. It makes you wonder what they are trying to hide. After all, "If you don't have anything to hide what are you worried about?" as they like to tell us.

Posted by Hussein Obama on 04/09/2008 10:36 AM EDT

Honesty and hope is what it's all about. I applaud this website for bringing a little bit of honesty to the halls of Congress. It brings a message of hope to the American People, letting them know that even the rich who are funded by taxpayer dollars and who are employed by the federal government can't hide in some dark corner, keeping their massive salaries hidden from public scrutiny. I, Hussein Obama, applaud this website.

Posted by mark on 04/09/2008 10:36 AM EDT

This is great information! I never realized my State Representative, Betty McCollum somehow needed 25 staff members at an annual cost of over $1,000,000! I am outraged by the waste!

Posted by anonymous on 04/09/2008 10:34 AM EDT

Wups! Sorry about the multiple posting! (Webmasters: you might want to institute a confirmatory message or page when the "Submit comment" has been successful. I incorrectly thought there had been a problem with my interpretation of the little image used to "verify that you are human".

Posted by We the People on 04/09/2008 10:34 AM EDT

The light of day is an excellent antiseptic! Good website!

Posted by JOhn on 04/09/2008 10:32 AM EDT

It is ALL public data! Every bit and byte in every single Government computer should have read only access by a no password guest account. If it isn't a national security secret, it should be wide open. A Government that keeps secrets from the people (especially FBI and police files) is a Nationalist Government (where "the Nations needs" are more important than the individuals rights.) Its called Nazi.

Posted by Dave on 04/09/2008 10:31 AM EDT

I think this free website database publication of top Congressional aides mandatory disclosure information is an excellent idea. These top Congressional aides are very powerful high level career partisan staff people. I've always thought these people should be subject to much more public scrutiny. With the exception of home addresses and Social Security numbers, (an issue already beig addressed) all this information SHOULD be public and readily accessible, not effectively made hidden by making public access to it made very inconvenient. As noted in a Waxhington Post article entitled "House Staffers Livid Over Website", "...Friedly noted that since his site began publishing the financial information of top aides, the Capitol Hill newspapers Roll Call and the Hill have published articles about questionable transactions by a trio of top staffers, and that the newspapers used LegiStorm to confirm information about the aides." IMO, THIS is the ultimate potential value of this website, helping to detect corrupted staffers, aloang with helping create an atmosphere of deterrence to fraud and corruption of high level public employees. Thank you to the people of Legistorm! You are doing a wonderful public service, long overdue.

Posted by Dave on 04/09/2008 10:30 AM EDT

Posted by Allen D on 04/09/2008 10:04 AM EDT

I have a suggestion for those congressional staff members who don't want their salaries and financial information revealed to all of us who pay their salaries: stop bellying up to the public trough and get a job in the private sector where you're judged on your abilities more than on who you know.

Posted by lpeoples61 on 04/09/2008 09:29 AM EDT

It's about time we know who some of the people are behind the scenes who actually pull the strings of our congress. If our marionette Congressmen and Congresswomen have a problem with this - it's because they are being exposed for the obtuse, uninspiring dolts that they really are!

Posted by lpeoples61 on 04/09/2008 09:28 AM EDT

Posted by Tracy on 04/09/2008 09:20 AM EDT

A good government is a transparent one and that has nothing to hide. We (the taxpayers) are paying these salaries and I like to know where my money is going. I just read on Drudge how credit card spending by Washington politicians is out of control. Money spent on expensive suits, lingerie, internet dating etc. Truly awful!!!! I am so tired of Washington. Just tired.

Posted by anonymous on 04/09/2008 09:01 AM EDT

Come on Congress, say it all together now you ignominious bastards, "it's our own damn fault."

Posted by Energyexpert on 04/09/2008 08:49 AM EDT

I am from germany and i would love it, if we would have a website, where we could take a good look, what our government earns with private contracts. Transparency is essential. I think its a great tool against corruption and i hope you survive the "legal storm".

Posted by Dee on 04/09/2008 12:20 AM EDT

Gee, how does it feel now that the shoe is on the other foot? We simple peons have suffered the loss of our "private" information for years with no relief from Washington. Now we can sit back and laugh our asses off at these people. WELCOME TO OUR WORLD YOU SELFISH, SELF ABSORBED BASTARDS!

Posted by diomedes on 04/08/2008 07:07 PM EDT

If i was a staffer and i was truly worried about my identity and what the public saw of my finances, i would have read the instructions and disclosed only what i needed to disclose. Looking at the documents there is a ton of frivolous, unnecessary information disclosed.

Posted by Researcher on 04/05/2008 04:10 PM EDT

What's the matter with Transparency? A good government is a Transparent one. Congress needs more transparency. See www.DisinviteMozilo.com

Posted by anonymous on 04/04/2008 01:39 PM EDT

As the blog post says, LegiStorm has agreed to scrub any information that troubles any staffer and doesn't harm the public's right to know. Just not at its expense since it doesn't have any revenues to speak of.

Posted by anonymous on 04/04/2008 12:13 PM EDT

Of course, The House should make it easier to protect information. However, Legistorm has the option to do the right thing and not put that information on the web. Instead, you're acting like a hurt little puppy that doesn't know where to turn. Please. The second comment is exactly right. Just scrub the information and be the good guy instead of taking an unprincipled stand for apparently no reason. Two wrongs don't make a right. Right?

Posted by anonymous on 04/03/2008 05:02 PM EDT

Seems like it was really easy before legistorm put this on the web. The only requirement was and still is that you be in the Washington DC metro area and that you can get down to capitol hill. The original post seems to say that you don't even need an ID to get to this info nor do you need to talk to anyone. That means that literally anyone can get at this info, convicted felon, tourist visiting from Hong Kong, anyone. If I worked on the hill and had my finances disclosed I would be pissed. Pissed at whoever setup this inadequate system. Not only can any anonymous person access these documents, but the house has the documents for a month before releasing them and they don't scrub out dangerous info like SS#s and account #s. Of course anyone who is providing financial documents for public access should probably black out those numbers before they hand their info in. There is certainly a reason to be mad, but at whom?

Posted by bob on 04/03/2008 11:41 AM EDT

Legistorm's solution is simplistic and silly. Far better, as suggested by some staffers, to have taxpayers fund a lawsuit against Legistorm. Good idea, even though, of course, Congress has been on a we-hate-lawsuit-happy-lawyers program lately. Let's spend tax dollars to sue a company that simply republishes information that is already public, by act of Congress, and as to which Congress (presumably after consultation with staffers) has placed no limits on such republication. But better yet, let's sue Congress too, since it's their fault (as suggested by Mr. Loveing's comment that Congress may have "liability" issues if someone misuses any public information)! Then the American public can pay for attorneys on both sides of a lawsuit where Congress is essentially suing itself! It will stimulate the economy better than any silly tax refund, because lawyers are known for being such big spenders! So much more sensible than simply having Congress make minor changes to the law.

Legistorm: Transparency's Sidekick

Hysteria over personal financial disclosures

60 comments so far

Leave a reply

» LegiStorm Blog

Latest posts

Feeds

Archive

Tags