trans·par·ent adj.

1. Capable of transmitting light so that objects or images can be seen as if there were no intervening material.
2. Permeable to electromagnetic radiation of specified frequencies, as to visible light or radio waves.
3. So fine in texture that it can be seen through; sheer.
4. 1. Easily seen through or detected; obvious: transparent lies.
   2. Free from guile; candid or open: transparent sincerity.

So while all of us thought that the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act was going to be transparent, as in candid and open, it's really just a transparent way to trasfer some amount of money from you the taxpayer to some undeserving Wall Street firms.  How much money?  Well, you're not allowed to know:

When the Treasury Department's bailout czar provided an update this week on the government's $700 billion plan to rescue troubled financial institutions, he vowed that it would be an "open and transparent program with appropriate oversight."

The next day, the Treasury Department put out an announcement about a major bailout-related contract with Bank of New York Mellon Corp. that fell short in the transparency department.

The copy of the agreement that was made public had blacked-out paragraphs in the section covering Bank of New York Mellon's compensation. If the Treasury Department is unwilling to disclose the particulars of that contract -- or even the general outline of the compensation scheme -- that raises questions about how it will treat disclosure of other bailout transactions.

If you follow the link, you can see a copy of the redacted documents that black out all the important information.  That was actually from last week.  There have been several new deals which have just come about, with similar information redacted as well.  The key question will be, whether the Treasure Dept. will do the same thing when following (if they bother to follow) Section 105 of the Stabilization Act which requires the Sec. of Treasury to report to Congress every 60 days with a lot of information, including:

a detailed financial statement with respect to the exercise of authority under this Act, including--

(A) all agreements made or renewed;
(B) all insurance contracts entered into pursuant to section 102;
(C) all transactions occurring during such period, including the types of parties involved;
(D) the nature of the assets purchased;
(E) all projected costs and liabilities;
(F) operating expenses, including compensation for financial agents;
(G) the valuation or pricing method used for each transaction; and
(H) a description of the vehicles established to exercise such authority.

Presumably, the information redacted in the earlier stories would be covered by this section.  So is Congress the only one allowed to know?  Would this information be redacted in a FOIFA response?  Are the people allowed to know exactly how their $700 billion dollars are being spent?  It is our money after all.

Via Reason.