Follow The Money:  Bailout’s Need for Accountability and Transparency

“When you see where the money is going,
America will trust where they money is going.”
 
As the debate over the “rescue” package demonstrates, we need put teeth in the laws, to hold bank board members and officers accountable for the use of government.
 
However, the issue of accountability is not being properly addressed by Congress.

 
The New York Times this weekend took aim at the issue of “clarity” with the Federal bailout:  Calls for Clarity in New Bailout for U.S. Banks
The G.A.O. report warned that unless future agreements allowed the Treasury Department to follow the money, the government might “have difficulty taking action” against firms that squander bailout money. What’s more, it said, the public may never know whether TARP achieved its stated goals of stabilizing the banking system, spurring new lending and providing relief to homeowners on the brink of foreclosure.
What does accountability mean?  It’s a word tossed around by a lot by politicians but it must be based on an effective accounting system that allows — as The Times states — the taxpayers to “follow” the money.  As a Congressman, I received a quarterly report where every check was written on the record — the public record — but this alone is not accountability.  That is like saturating people with too much information.
As for the bailout, we should have started in October with a system that said, “We’re going to give you money but you can’t commingle government bailout funds with other corporate operating capital funds.”
No money for your friends.  No money for dividends.  No money for corporate jaunts.  No money for bonuses. We should see that all money from TARP is going into a separate accounting system, something like a charge and discharge statement.   When you see where the money is going, America will trust where the money is going.