Public needs wider view of Isle stimulus spending
So, how is that federal stimulus program going?
That's a tough question to answer, judging by the puzzlement from some in Hawai'i's nonprofit and private sectors about how the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is supposed to work.
It's time for state officials to communicate their plan — especially for critical safety-net programs — for taking maximum advantage of the federal largess in an open, accountable way. There will be an opportunity to bring more clarity to spending plans this week when the governor is due to present a revised budget, based on the most recent state revenue projections.
To some extent, all of the states have been struggling to make sense of what strings may be attached to specific allotments within the $787 billion spending bill and what deadlines need to be met. The Obama administration did not disclose the rules for several weeks, even though governors have to sign written commitments that the money will be spent as intended.
A bit more direction was provided by the White House on Friday, when the president issued guidelines aimed at safeguarding the money from being siphoned off by special interests instead of those best positioned to fulfill the goals of the stimulus program.
Projects to get the highest priority will include those that accomplish:
Any overtures by lobbyists need to be made in writing and will be posted online. This is a welcome sign, because transparency is one means of protecting those taxpayer funds from fraud and abuse.
At the local level, a similar gesture is needed to improve communications on where the money is going.
One key issue concerns the use of a particular Medicaid-related pot of money known as Federal Medical Assistance Percentage funds. The Lingle administration has directed $320 million in these funds to fill holes in the overall budget, something the stimulus law does not preclude.
But the better policy is to use this money first to make sure all crucial health and social-service obligations can be met, and then apply any excess to more general needs. The fact that the demand for services is sure to grow underscores the importance of making safety-net programs a priority.
There should be a clear blueprint showing how these funds help cover most critical needs and so far, the service providers haven't seen one.
Where the administration has done better is in outlining the construction-oriented spending. A Web site is taking shape (hawaii.gov/recovery), and the section on infrastructure offers lists of projects, timelines and, importantly, a link for those who would bid on them.
Granted, this is a work in progress, but the rest of the site needs to include that kind of detail and provide that kind of onramp for those in the private and nonprofit sectors that could qualify for the funds.
To its credit, the administration has set early internal deadlines for advertising contracts to ensure the money will be committed on time, and has a set of "Plan B" infrastructure projects to substitute in cases of unforeseen delays. The imperative has been sent through its departments to ride herd on the projects and to keep the lines of communication open.
But so far, the rest of us in the general public are left to guess what's going on.
An important role of government, especially in these circumstances, is to convey confidence that such a massive investment of taxpayer money will deliver the best "bang for the buck" possible.
The public is still waiting, and hoping, for that message to come down.
