WASHINGTON   –  U.S. Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (MO-08) today derided administration officials for delaying public reporting requirements under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, also known as the federal stimulus.  Emerson opposes the $787 billion package of new spending and voted against it earlier this year.

“As further proof that the federal government is much better at spending taxpayer money than at tracking it, the American public will have to wait until spring 2010 to see the details of the stimulus.  That’s like getting an estimate and paying for the work on the spot, then getting your receipt a year later,” Emerson said.  “It’s totally irresponsible to hijack taxpayer funds this way and then keep the spending a secret from the people who are paying for it.”

Emerson also found fault with new six to nine month delays in rules requiring a minimum level of details when the stimulus spending is reported on the federal website, recovery.gov.  In the meantime, the website only reports cursory information.

“In some cases, the spending is funneled through a state, then a city, then a contractor.  If these rules only require reporting of the first two entities to touch the money, the public will never know where and how it ultimately gets spent.  No one, even members of Congress, is getting a sufficient level of detail on this huge government expenditure.  It greatly concerns me,” Emerson said.

She also dismissed claims that the massive amount of information is a justifiable reason for delay in making contracts and grant awards available to the American public.

“The federal government can easily handle spending $787 billion in a very short period of time, but it has a lot of difficulty explaining how it spends the money.  Clearly, there is too little accountability in this process and, frankly, the attitude of secrecy here makes it very tough to trust that the stimulus is being spent wisely or well,” Emerson said.  “The constituents I represent in Missouri and I deserve a much more accountable product from an $84 million board whose only job is the transparency of this spending.”