So how is Obama's transparency promise holding up? 

It's really not, when you look at the TARP program and the latest SIGTARP report, and Recovery.gov (at least before its fancy and extremely costly makeover) certainly fails to live up to the expectations the administration had raised in taxpayers. 

And we'll see how Recovery.gov will hold up after the makeover. It took some serious prodding by many for the GSA to release the contract, and we still don't know what we're getting for it, because it has been so heavily redacted that it is almost useless.

A CNN Money story reaches a similar conclusion today:

The Obama administration pledged unprecedented transparency in its accounting of the $700 billion bank and auto bailouts (TARP) and the $787.2 billion Recovery Act. A lot of information has been made public but there are some key details where the transparency falls far short.

Here's what we still don't know:

1. How are banks using TARP funds?

2. Who are bailed out banks lending to?

3. What is the value of the assets that Treasury has accumulated as a result of TARP?

4. Where are stimulus funds ultimately going?

They're important questions: We want the government to ensure it is spending our money wisely, and experts want to know why the Obama administration won't provide the answers.

And on the "stimulus:"

The accounting of stimulus has been met with less scrutiny, mostly because Congress made it a point to track how every dollar was spent after struggling to get the same information from the TARP program.

Still, the government's accounting only goes as far as the first tier recipients from the states. For example, say a construction company gets stimulus funds from the state of Nebraska. That company has to report the receipt of those funds to the government, but if they hire a dump truck company and an asphalt company to do the work, that doesn't get reported.

So is the promise of transparency broken? You be the judge.