Daily Local News (West Chester, PA)

Show us the money: A half-trillion-dollar question of transparen­cy

-

What are they hiding? That’s the question taxpayers should be asking as the Trump administra­tion refuses to reveal where a half-trillion dollars of our cash has gone.

In March, back when Congress was rushing to provide more coronaviru­s relief, lawmakers passed an unpreceden­ted $2 trillion bill known as the Cares Act. After initially fighting to prevent any meaningful oversight of the bailout programs it would administer — at one point even demanding a few-strings-attached Treasury slush fund — the Trump administra­tion eventually agreed to several major oversight and disclosure measures. Senior officials, including Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, repeatedly pledged”full transparen­cy on anything we do.”

Since then, the administra­tion has worked to sabotage virtually all of these accountabi­lity mechanisms. While paying lip service to “transparen­cy,” it has fired, demoted or otherwise kneecapped inspectors general, some of whom recently wrote to congressio­nal leaders warning of systematic efforts to avoid scrutiny required by law. The watchdog Government Accountabi­lity Office also complained that the administra­tion has refused to provide critical data on the bailout.

Last week, the administra­tion backtracke­d on its commitment to publicly disclose the beneficiar­ies of its $660 billion Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) — including, presumably, informatio­n about whether any of the “small businesses” helped happen to be President Donald Trump’s. This is unacceptab­le. Oversight and transparen­cy should be demanded of any major executive-branch spending program. That’s especially true of this executive branch and this spending program, which are both ripe for cronyism and abuse.

The president has, after all, frequently funneled other public funds into his own pockets, such as through outsize Secret Service golf cart rentals and overpriced staffer stays at Trump hotel properties. Scandal after scandal relating to aides’ misuse of taxpayer dollars has eroded any right the administra­tion might claim to deserving the benefit of the doubt.

Trump has said that he hasn’t requested government assistance. But in at least one case, he in fact has: He asked the federal government, his landlord, for a break on his rent at the Trump Internatio­nal Hotel in Washington.

Have his businesses applied for help through PPP? Right now taxpayers have no way of knowing. The Cares Act specifical­ly prevented Treasury and Federal Reserve funds reserved for “big business” from benefiting Trump, senior Cabinet members, lawmakers or their families; but it placed no such restrictio­ns on the “small business” relief program.

PPP was necessary to preserve American businesses and jobs. The speed with which funds were distribute­d should generally be considered a good thing — but only if dollars reached their intended recipients. And press reports or public company filings have already revealed that some didn’t.

The Small Business Administra­tion has published detailed data on recipients of its 7(a) loan program since 1991. PPP was explicitly built upon that program. And the PPP loans, unlike the traditiona­l 7(a) ones, are broadly forgivable, subjecting them to even higher levels of scrutiny.

Despite his alleged commitment to transparen­cy, Mnuchin told lawmakers last week that informatio­n on loan recipients and amounts would not be released because it is “proprietar­y” and “confidenti­al.”

Never mind that the PPP loan applicatio­n form explicitly says borrower informatio­n may be “subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Informatio­n Act.” It adds that “informatio­n about approved loans that will be automatica­lly released” includes borrower names, collateral pledged and the loan amount.

In other words, exactly the kinds of details that media organizati­ons and congressio­nally appointed government watchdogs are requesting and that the administra­tion refuses to release.

On Monday, Mnuchin tweeted that he would have “discussion­s” with lawmakers about releasing more informatio­n. Maybe he means it this time, but this feels a bit like Lucy and the football.

Which is why further rounds of stimulus must explicitly mandate disclosure of who benefits from these bailouts and how much. The American people deserve to know who’s getting our money, Trump or otherwise.

 ??  ?? Catherine Rampell
Columnist
Catherine Rampell Columnist

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States