In This Issue FirstGov Up and Running   Stargazer Foundation Hosts Nonprofit Agenda   Oregon Anti-Advocacy Ballot Initiatives Defeat Not Assured   "90/10" Debt Relief Bill   Eleven Appropriation Bills to Go   Charitable Choice Included in Multiple Appropriations Bills   E-Rate Program Addresses the Digital Divide   HUD's Green Maps Breach Agency "Silo"   Pending Bill Could Increase Donations to Nonprofits   Measuring the Quality of E-Government   Tech Help: Open Source Software and Application Service Providing    Notes and Sidebars   FirstGov Up and Running On Friday, September 22nd -- exactly 90 days after the President's June 24th announcement of its planned implementation -- the federal government's Internet portal, FirstGov, was launched. We encourage you to go take a look, use it, and provide comments to the General Services Administration (GSA) on it. It gives very impressive -- and very fast -- recall of web pages from federal government sites and provides useful links to some non-governmental sites (e.g., for information about state and local governments). At the press conference on Friday afternoon, David Barram, Administrator of GSA, and Sally Katzen, Deputy Director of Management at OMB, presented it as a work in progress that will improve as they hear what the public wants. Eric Brewer, the co-founder of Inktomi and the person who made FirstGov technologically and financially possible, said he hopes and intends for it to promote democracy by promoting government accountability and also to spur government to move more energetically into the use of the Internet for governance and service to the public. OMB Watch is developing comments about the new web portal for a House hearing planned for October 2. The hearing will be chaired by Rep. Steve Horn (R-CA). www.firstgov.gov Back to Top Stargazer Foundation Hosts Nonprofit Agenda Stargazer Foundation has agreed to host four "virtual meetings" of 30 nonprofits to develop specific recommendations to the next President to strengthen the nonprofit sector. The 30 nonprofits will be guided by the results of a survey distributed through the Internet two weeks ago by OMB Watch, Advocacy Institute, National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy and The Union Institute. The survey has created quite a stir in the nonprofit community. More than 700 people have completed the 37-question survey online. Moreover, most provided detailed comments regarding their perspectives. The survey, which asks nonprofits about their priorities for the upcoming presidential administration, is available until close of business of September 26. At that time, the survey will be closed and the data presented to the 30 groups meeting through the Stargazer Foundation. These meetings will use Internet technologies, such as document sharing and virtual "white boards", to facilitate participation by groups spread all over the country. Using the results of the online survey as a basis, participants will develop a series of specific recommendations to strengthen the nonprofit sector for the incoming presidential administration. The results of these meetings will be summarized in a report, which will be made available to the nonprofit community for comment via the Web and other electronic media. After the November election, members of the committee will seek a meeting with the presidential transition team and will present the priorities and policy recommendations of the nonprofit community. The Nonprofit Sector Issues and the President Survey Back to Top Opposition to Anti-Advocacy Ballot Initiatives Growing in Oregon But Defeat is Not Assured Over 200 organizations and elected officials have signed a statement of opposition to two ballot measures that would restrict the advocacy rights of Oregon nonprofits. The first initiative, Ballot Measure 92, would apply to public and private employees, and would prohibit payroll deductions for any "political purpose" unless there is an annual written authorization from the employee on a form used specifically for that purpose. This initiative specifically covers charities and its definition of "political purposes" includes lobbying on legislative matters and supporting or opposing referenda. The second, Ballot Measure 98, is extremely similar to an initiative that failed 53-47% in 1998 (Ballot Measure 59), and states that "no public funds shall be spent to collect or assist in the collection of political funds." "Public funds" include employee time, space, equipment and supplies, thereby curtailing any government employee giving program. For more information on the specifics and potential impact of the legislation, refer to the href="/ombwatcher/ombw20000828.html">August 28, 2000 Watcher. While opposition is growing, defeat of these measures is far from assured. If enacted, these initiatives would mire voluntary paycheck deduction programs in paperwork, thereby making it extremely difficult for organizations who depend on workplace giving programs to engage in public policy issues. Organizations such as the United Way, who run perhaps the most well-known paycheck deduction program, could find themselves unable to advocate on behalf of their clients because of the burdens placed on them by these initiatives. Successful passage of these initiatives may also serve as a model for future attempts to limit nonprofits' advocacy rights in other states. The group leading the opposition to these initiatives, the Coalition Against Unnecessary & Unfair Constitutional Amendments, is asking groups to endorse their statement of opposition, as well as inform any of their members in Oregon of the initiatives. Because this is a ballot initiative, the outreach effort must reach all Oregon voters. Passage of these initiatives would have a serious impact on many Oregon nonprofits -- as well as possibly set in motion initiatives in other states. Back to Top "90/10" Debt Relief Bill The House overwhelmingly passed HR 5173, the "Debt Relief Lockbox Act, on September 18, setting aside 90% of the FY 2001 surplus for debt reduction. That bill has now been included in another bill that makes changes to retirement and pensions -- HR 1102, the "Comprehensive Retirement Security and Pension Reform Act," passed by the House in July. The new bill combining the debt relief language and the pension reform language is HR 5203, the "Debt Relief and Retirement Security Reconciliation Act." It passed the House on Wednesday, September 20, 401 to 20, and has been sent to the Senate. This new bill is a "reconciliation" bill, with limited debate, amendments, and no ability to filibuster, making it easier to pass and resistant to extraneous amendments. Further, the debt reduction provisions are enormously popular. While this seems like a complicated way to go about things, this has been a complicated Congress. An analysis of a related pension bill by Center on Budget and Policy Priorities discusses the effect of the pension reform measures in HR 5203 on low- to moderate-income workers. An OMB Watch summary of the debt reduction provisions questions the use of 90% of the fiscal year 2001 surplus, including $42 billion of the non-Social Security surplus, for debt reduction. Why has debt reduction become the primary goal of most parties? According to our analysis, part of the reason there is a non-Social Security surplus is because of the sharp cuts in domestic discretionary spending imposed by the budget caps. Now, the budget is in surplus and the nation is enjoying overall economic prosperity, and we are being told that the surplus must be protected from domestic investment in order to pay down the national debt. Why is it that investing in America's people and communities always gets put at the bottom of the priority pile? While it is a common perception that people are against government spending, polls consistently indicate that people want investment in specific areas. An ABC/Washington Post poll conducted early in September found that a whopping 37% of respondents wanted budget surplus money to be spent for domestic programs like education and health. This was much higher than even strengthening Social Security (29%) and well over what policy makers are concentrating on -- reducing the debt was only 19% and cutting taxes only 14%. For a more in-depth analysis of public opinion about how the surplus should be spent, see Economic Policy Institute Issue Brief #135. In another EPI brief about the budget surplus, Jeff Faux and Max Sawicky describe the current debate over the budget surplus: "While congressional Republicans and administration Democrats argue over the size of tax cuts and debt reduction, the third leg of budget policy - social investment - remains too short, imperiling future economic and social stability." Back to Top Eleven Appropriation Bills to Go Before Scheduled Adjournment of October 6 It's difficult to predict what the "endgame" of the appropriations skirmish will bring, although rumors abound. (It's also hard to avoid football metaphors, since these last few weeks have certainly resembled game-like behavior, with some bending of the rules.) Members of Congress are itching to go home and campaign, especially given a number of very tight races, but they remember last year's "train wreck" where the debris got swept up into a big omnibus bill and the President got a lot of concessions and increased spending. There is a strong reluctance by Congress to repeat that scenario. Admitting that they can't get the appropriations bills passed on time, the House will consider, probably tomorrow, a continuing resolution that will fund government operations through October 6 or 7. A continuing resolution would likely be passed and signed by the President. The new fiscal year starts October 1, and only two appropriations bills have actually been passed. The usual appropriations process is that the House and Senate separately debate and pass each of the thirteen appropriations bills. Then each bill goes to a House/Senate conference to resolve differences between the two versions. Then the House and Senate each vote on that "conferenced" bill, and it is filed and goes to the President for his signature or a veto. The new strategy is to try to pass the appropriations bills two-by-two, taking a bill that has gone through the Senate/House conference and attaching to it another bill that hasn't yet been debated or passed by the Senate (since the Senate still hasn't even passed four appropriations bills). At least it's a relief to get away from football talk to two-by-two metaphors -- the animals trooping two-by-two into Noah's Ark, or the length and width of a piece of wood. The inability to pass the Legislative Branch appropriation with the Treasury-Postal bill hanging on its coattails (not yet debated by the Senate) on Wednesday, September 20, was an embarrassing failure of this new "two-by-two" mini-omnibus strategy. Nevertheless, Republican leadership appears to remain committed to that strategy. So, the Legislative Branch/Treasury Postal combo is being worked on for another try. The exact combinations of bills to be paired is not clear, nor is it clear whether leadership can manage to craft the bills so that they can both get passed and still get the President's signature. Why are there so many problems? While there is a fairly large gap (estimated about $20 billion) between the Administration and Congress over the overall amount of money to be spent for appropriations, and that remains a difficult issue, it's not the only hang-up by any means. The Legislative and Treasury-Postal bill didn't pass because of Democratic anger about the jimmying of normal appropriations procedures (the "two-by-two" strategy) that allowed no debate of the Treasury-Postal bill on the Senate Floor and thus no opportunity by the Senate to revise or add amendments. (Since conference report debates are only for resolving differences between the House and Senate version, no new amendments or adjustments can be made.) There is some indication that Democrats will oppose any bills that are attempted in this two-by-two fashion. On the other hand, some Republican members objected to a provision raising pay for lawmakers, that could become an election year salvo, and fiscally conservative Republicans didn't want to see higher spending, even though there is recognition that there must be some increases in spending to avoid Presidential veto. There are also still some major policy disputes. One good example is the Labor-HHS-Education bill, which is hung up because the GOP wants money given to the states as block grants but Democrats want specific earmarks for class size, teacher numbers, and school modernization. Even if they agree on the amount of money, they disagree on how it is to be implemented. Republicans also want to stop regulations on ergonomic workplace safeguards, and included that in a rider to the bill. The Labor-HHS-Education bill has already gone through conference, but since the conference report hasn't been filed, there are still adjustments going on. Whether these adjustments will be to provide enough concessions for a Presidential signature, or to make a political point from a Presidential veto, is still debatable. But with everyone worried about the election and the need to get out there and campaign, there is evidence that an effort is being made to craft bills that the President will sign. The stalemate on the Interior bill may be ended, with the addition of $1.9 billion for fire-fighting efforts in the West and a less expensive "down-payment" version of the president's environmental measures -- including the Lands Legacy Initiative to purchase and maintain environmentally fragile land. That still may not be enough to avoid a Presidential veto. Furthermore, the Interior spending bill (along with other appropriations) contains a number of anti-environmental riders, including extension of expiring grazing permits for another ten years. President Clinton has already threatened to veto appropriations bills containing riders "aimed at weakening public health protections, blocking common-sense efforts to combat climate change, and surrendering public lands to private interests." As reported today by BNA, the President is also concerned that an extension of the Internet tax moratorium for five years might yet be attached to a piece of legislation, including, presumably, one of the appropriations bills. The President would oppose this extension. (In May, the House passed a bill (HR 3709) that would extend the moratorium for five more years past its current expiration date in October 2001.) Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-DS) called this year's appropriations process "one of the greatest messes with the appropriations schedule I've seen since I've been in Congress." We'd have to agree. Back to Top Charitable Choice Included in Multiple Appropriations Bills Ten bills pending before Congress would dramatically expand "charitable choice", making it possible for religious congregations to compete for federal funds for educational and health programs. Currently, congregations can compete for funds under the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 and the Health and Human Services Reauthorization Act of 1998. The Community Renewal and New Markets Act of 2000, which passed the House by a wide margin in July, would allow congregations to compete for funds for drug and alcohol treatment. The Senate version extends charitable choice to all federal social service programs and relaxes educational requirements for staff if congregations can show a record of success or if state standards cannot be supported by empirical evidence. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Act (S. 976) is in conference, where the Senate must decide whether or not to accept charitable choice language passed by the House. In addition, HR 3222, the Literacy Involves Families Together bill (Even Start Program), contains the first charitable choice provisions that would apply to educational programs. Over two dozen national organizations representing educators, congregations, civil rights, human services and labor organizations sent a letter to Congress on September 20th opposing its passage. The Congressional Black Caucus Foundation sponsored a forum "Charitable Choice- A New Threat to Civil Rights" during their annual legislative conference on September 14th. Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) noted that there has never been a hearing or floor debate in Congress to address the serious constitutional concerns raised by current versions of charitable choice. Panel member Melissa Rogers, General Counsel to the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, opposed charitable choice as a threat to separation of church and state, and noted that religious organizations have alternatives under current law that allow them to compete for federal funds. Leslie Proll of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund noted that current versions of charitable choice would permit congregations to discriminate on the basis of religion when hiring or firing for federal funded positions. Back to Top E-Rate Program Addresses the Digital Divide "E-Rate and the Digital Divide: A Preliminary Analysis From the Integrated Studies of Educational Technology," a report prepared by the Urban Institute for the U.S. Department of Education and released it last week, found that more than 85 percent of funds available in the first two years of the E-Rate program are going to schools. Also, the country's poorest school districts received nearly 10 times as much funding as did better off districts. By the end of the E-Rate program's second year, 70,000 public schools, 5,000 private schools and 4,500 libraries were participating in the program. However, Education Secretary Richard Riley has noted that there are some areas that are so poor that even with the 90 percent discount, the 10 percent they have to come up with disables them from using the E-Rate. Also, according to Urban Institute, the bureaucracy associated with applying for E-rate funding is a barrier for small and poor schools which often do not have the personnel needed to complete the initial application process to participate in the E-rate program. The Federal Communications Commission and the Schools and Libraries Division of the Universal Service Administrative Corp., which oversee the E-rate program, are working to simplify the application process and the Schools and Libraries Division is offering technical assistance. The E-rate program is supported by payments telephone companies make into a fund for providing low-cost services to rural and underserved areas. While more than three-fourths of public school districts have applied for E-rate funds, half of public libraries and 15 percent of private schools have done so. Funding for the program's third year is still being distributed. Back to Top HUD's Green Maps Breach Agency "Silo" The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) last week unveiled E-Maps, a series of online maps that allow the public to map environmental and housing data. By introducing E-Maps, HUD took another in a series of federal government steps toward giving the public information held by the government in ways the public understands without regard to where the information exists across government agencies. The maps, developed by HUD's Community 20/20 program, allows users to view data from the Environmental Protection Agency on hazardous waste sites, toxic chemical releases in communities, Superfund sites and other information as well as HUD's demographic, housing and other data for a specified geographic region. The site has attracted so much interest that the HUD computer systems have been overloaded. As a result, we have been unable to test the new service. E-Maps can be found at <www.hud.gov/emaps>. Back to Top Pending Bill Could Increase Donations to Nonprofits The Retirement Security and Savings Act of 2000 (HR 1102) includes a provision that would allow donors age 70½ and older to withdraw funds from Individual Retirement Accounts and donate to charities without having to include the funds in their gross income. Donations must be made directly to 501(c)(3) organizations or planned gifts, such as charitable remainder trusts. (Under current law persons aged 59½ and older can withdraw IRA funds without penalties, but the amounts withdrawn count as taxable income.) The provision is expected to cost the Treasury an estimated $1.7 billion over the next ten years. The House of Representatives passed the bill by a wide margin in July, and the Senate version was approved unanimously by the Senate Finance Committee on September 7. No floor vote has yet been scheduled. If passed and signed by the President, it will be effective for tax years beginning in 2001. Back to Top Measuring the Quality of E-Government Earlier this month, a group of researchers, led by Darrell M. West, professor of political science and director of Brown University's Taubman Center for Public Policy and American Institutions, released a study of federal and state websites in a report, "Assessing E-Government: The Internet, Democracy, and Service Delivery by State and Federal Governments". The researchers looked at 1,813 websites (1,716 state government websites, 36 federal government legislative and executive sites, and 61 federal court sites) for the quality and effectiveness of electronic government, and featured an e-mail survey of chief information officers in each state and 38 agencies. First the good news: Of the chief information officers surveyed, 86% said e-government improved service delivery, 83% felt it increased efficiency, and 64% believed it reduced costs. In terms of responsiveness, a whopping 91% of government websites responded to an e-mail request for official office hours, with three-quarters of those sites responding within one business day. Now, the bad news:

• only 5% of government websites have a security policy;
• only 7% of government websites have a privacy policy;
• only 15% of government websites have disability access;
• only 4% offer foreign language translation;
• only 22% offer some means for conducting transactions with government (license renewal, tax payments, etc.); and
• some sites present commercial advertising

The study found that the federal government had better information and service websites than the states overall. With respect to the states, the best predictor of high ranking in terms of "e-government" service was the size of its population. The states with smaller populations tend to lack resources to support the economies of scale to adopt online government services (it costs more to implement similar systems across smaller user bases than larger ones, where cost per user is less). Interestingly, at the federal level, judicial websites did worse than executive or legislative ones in terms of providing basic contact information for their agencies, or even links to other resources. The study, in general, points to a great need for consistency and standardization within and among government agencies from the national down to local level in order to make "e-government" a workable proposition. According to Jeremy Sharrard, author of a August 2000 Forrester Research report titled "Sizing U.S. eGovernment," government entities (federal, state, and local) will collect about 15 percent, or $602 billion of their fees and taxes through online means by the year 2006, regardless of the level of bureaucratic barriers. In order for this to happen, though, there are three phases that "e-government' will have to go through. First, there will be two years of experimentation, with low-level and low-risk transactions. Second, the public must adapt to and adopt "e-government" in principle and practice. The third and final phase involves coordinated, customer-centered services across agencies, mostly at the local level, through the force of legislative reforms. The report predicts that "e-government" will not be implemented on the federal level until sometime between 2002 and 2005. Back to Top Tech Help: Open Source Software and Application Service Providing With Open Source Software (OSS), it's all in the name; it's a trend that's focused on opening up the process and the range of free tools that nonprofits can access. Application Service Providing (ASP) is another potential money saver. The idea behind an ASP is that by outsourcing potentially costly software needs to a third-party host/provider, organizations save money on acquisition and maintenance costs. NPTalk takes you frame by frame and will have your group informed. Just click here, it's our data, so mine it... Subscribe to NPTalk Back to Top Your comments are always welcomed! Notes and Sidebars Job announcement OMB Watch is seeking a Staff Assistant/Web Writer to write and edit articles for web site, compile a biweekly online newsletter, perform administrative duties (including some web site administration), respond to inquiries about public databases, and other duties as assigned. Good position for entry-level college graduate with interest in public policy and nonprofit sector. Please see our full announcement. Awards Program Nominations The Ford Foundation, in partnership with the Advocacy Institute and the Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service at NYU, has announced a new awards program, Leadership for a Changing World, that aims to recognize community leaders who are successfully addressing social problems. The six year, $19 million project will recognize a total of 60 leaders and leadership teams with financial awards, a major research initiative, and numerous forums. Nominations will be accepted by the Advocacy Institute through January 5, 2001. Leaders must be nominated by someone who is acquainted with their work and can attest to their qualifications. For more information, and to download nomination materials, visit the Leadership for Change website. Technology Conference The Technology Opportunities Program, a federal program under the Department of Commerce, will host its Networks for People 2000 conference on October 30-31 in Arlington, VA. The theme of this year's conference is "Entrepreneurship: Nonprofits @ Internet Speed" and it will feature panels on how people acquire technical skills, what it means to be a nonprofit entrepreneur, what the changing role of leadership means to the nonprofit community, among other issues. For more information on the conference and online registration, visit the National Telecommunications and Information Administration web site and go to "grants," "TOP," and "Conferences and Workshops."