I’ll certainly be interested in how the mechanics of this works out:
The president-elect has insisted that investments proposed in the recovery plan meet standards much higher than has been traditional. There will be no earmarks. Investments will be chosen strategically based on what yields the highest rate of return for the economy and monitored closely not just by officials but also by the public as government becomes more transparent. We expect to evaluate and to be evaluated rigorously to ensure that Washington is held accountable for how tax dollars are spent.
For one thing who is “the public”? The governors of the states who’ve already presented their lists of “shovel-ready” projects, many of them boondoggles? The state legislatures who’ve already rejected some of those plans?
Representatives from various NGO’s, each with its own axe to grind and who aren’t any more immune to political considerations than a cigar-chewing ward heeler?
I’m afraid these are technocratic fantasies. Dealing with the economy requires that you deal with people, dealing with people means politics, and politics means you get your hands dirty and operate with something less than the “highest rate of return”.
Knowing the Obama approach, I expect that most of this will be made very transparent, that they will establish web sites devoted to feedback on various projects. Maybe a sort of StimuWiki that invites the public to comment on and debate projects, and then to monitor progress.
I’m not sure it wouldn’t work, at least a little. A few hundred thousand busybody citizens looking over the shoulders of pols and contractors, empowered by a sense that their complaints will be seen by people in a position to respond?
Not to mention that they’re trying to churn this out now, in a few months. It would have been nice to have a little longer to get all the paper work worked out, and to produce some estimates on how much certain projects will cost.