On Jan. 22, executive agencies posted hundreds of datasets onto Data.gov as required under the Open Government Directive (OGD). Many transparency advocates have lauded the administration’s efforts while at the same time raising questions about how well this first initiative under the OGD actually worked. The release of the datasets has triggered discussions about the value of the data, how individual privacy rights are protected, whether the datasets being released are new, and the quality of the data that has been released.

In its long-awaited decision on the dangers of bisphenol-A (BPA) exposure, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that it believes there is some concern about the effects of BPA on children. This is a shift from the agency's recent position that BPA is safe. The agency says its ability to regulate the chemical, however, is limited by FDA's outdated regulatory authority.

In response to the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission opinion announced on Jan. 21, many nonprofits and political leaders are mobilizing to address the impact of the decision. Nonprofits, in particular, are taking the lead in ensuring that the voices of ordinary Americans are not diminished by an influx of corporate money into electoral politics.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on Jan. 21 a new practice that will prevent chemical manufacturers from hiding the identities of chemicals that have been found to pose a significant risk to environmental or public health. The policy is a small step to increase the transparency of the nation's chemical laws, and it highlights both the problem of excessive secrecy and the power of the executive branch to make government more open – even without action by Congress or the courts.

OMB Watch has put together a simple chart that compares the projected federal budget deficit with the projected savings from President Obama's proposed three-year freeze on non-defense discretionary spending. The chart is in miniature at right, with the red bar representing the projected deficit and the blue bar representing the savings from the spending freeze. OMB Watch's Fiscal Policy Director, Craig Jennings, has more, including a full-size version of the chart.

WASHINGTON, Jan. 21, 2010—On Jan. 28, OMB Watch will launch a series of panel discussions designed to explore and assess the first year of the Obama administration.

Excessive secrecy prevents the public from knowing what chemicals are used in their communities and what health impacts might be associated with those substances, according to a recent analysis of government data by the nonprofit Environmental Working Group (EWG). The growing practice of concealing data alleged to be trade secrets has seemingly hobbled regulators' ability to protect the public from potential risks from thousands of chemicals.

Recovery Act recipient reporting has received a great deal of attention in the media, and while some of this coverage has been critical (reporting on non-existent congressional districts or ZIP codes, unreliable job creation numbers, etc.), many news articles portray comprehensive oversight of the act because of transparency requirements in the law. However, approximately two-thirds of the spending in the Recovery Act bypasses these requirements, leading to a dearth of information about how the money is being spent. As time passes and Recovery Act spending continues, this lack of data is becoming more apparent, as highlighted by a recent Internal Revenue Service (IRS) report showing that millions of dollars in Recovery Act tax breaks are vulnerable to tax fraud.

On Dec. 29, 2009, President Obama signed an executive order (E.O. 13526) to prescribe a uniform system of classifying and declassifying government information. The new order was welcomed by open government advocacy groups and will go into effect on June 27.