Transparency, Advice and Committees

Does the government need a law requiring that agencies be more transparent in how they gather input from industry and the public in developing policies and regulations? John Kamensky of the IBM Center for the Business of Government points out today that it already has one -- and it's 40 years old.

The original purposes of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, he writes, "are still very much a priority -- to promote citizen participation and transparency, to ensure objectivity in advice to federal agencies and limit the influence of special interests, and to ensure efficiency in the use of resources by periodically reviewing committees to ensure they serve a useful purpose." But the law, he notes, is "increasingly irrelevant" as agencies look for ways to get around its requirements in their efforts to seek citizen input.

New research by the Administrative Conference of the United States has found that an executive order issued by President Clinton capping the number of advisory committees in the interest of efficiency has actually hindered agencies from gathering feedback from the public. The research concluded that agencies believe they have to develop strong cases for new advisory panels before seeking permission to form them, so instead they look for ways to get around the law. GSA has responsibility for enforcing the cap on committees.