One of the frustrating things about working on federal budget issues is that nothing seems to change very much.  The same issues, the same data sources, the same organizations seem to be around year after year.  Even when there's a major disturbance in the fiscal force like Gramm-Rudman-Hollings or some other major new process, things quickly give you a sense of budget deja vu.

Subsidyscope, one of the latest projects by the Pew Charitable Trusts, has the potential to be different...and a game changer at least at the microlevel.  As the basic paper describing the project explains, it's not going to advocate for or against any federal subsidies, it's simply going to make it clear who and what is being subsidized.  And, very significantly, the reports will include both spending and tax subsidies:

1. Direct Expenditures, including direct transfers of money, goods or services, such as cash grants or the donation of government surplus.

2. Tax Expenditures, which lower the taxes certain parties pay the federal government by allowing special tax exemptions, deductions or credits.

3. Risk Transfers, which convey financial risk to the federal government through insurance agreements, loans, loan guarantees and similar instruments.

4. Government contracts for which the government pays more than fair market value for a good or service or provides a preference for certain types of businesses.

This paper on airport subsidies shows why the project could be so valuable.  Subsidyscope combined existing publicly available information with other data obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests to put together a list of airports that received subsidies, including many that were listed as lower priorities by the Federal Aviation Administration.

As with all Pew projects, Subsidyscope has an outstanding board advising the project that is likely to make its repots valuable.

Now...if we can just get them to be seen and read...