POGO Urges House to Support GAO Audits of Intel Community

POGO is urging Congress to vote in favor of an amendment that would enhance oversight of the intelligence community.

The amendment, sponsored by Reps. Anna Eshoo (D-CA), Howard Berman (D-CA), Rush Holt (D-WV), Mike Thompson (D-CA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), and John Tierney (D-MS), would require the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to comply with Government Accountability Office (GAO) audits.

The GAO would provide the in-depth, careful analysis Congress needs to conduct effective oversight of the intelligence community. As argued in a letter sent this afternoon to the House of Representatives:

GAO reports play an essential role in effective congressional oversight of the intelligence community. And yet, the Obama administration and the intelligence community repeatedly have moved to block GAO reports to Congress, including by issuing a veto threat to the Intelligence Authorization bill that would have restored GAO's role in oversight. Cutting off critical oversight tools does not make us safer, but rather puts our nation at risk by limiting the information Congress needs in order to assess national security threats, civil liberties violations, misuse of taxpayer dollars, gaps in information sharing, and problematic management issues.

We noted in March that statutorily, the intel community already falls within the GAO's purview, but that since the 1960's, it has successfully resisted investigations into its activities and operations. Steve Aftergood has more background here.

-- Bryan Rahija

See also:

• White House Threatens Veto Over GAO Role in Intel Oversight
• Congress Fighting for Its Ability to Conduct Oversight of Intel Community

Comments

[Mike]

I totally agree that the intelligence community needs GAO oversight. I have audited intelligence agency contracts and can attest that the intelligence community contracting officers bend over backwards to give sweet deals to contractors. Audit findings are routinely ignored in the "interest of national security." If the President and Congress want to save money, cut the intelligence budgets and then maybe the contracting officers will get serious about negotiating fair and reasonable contract prices. Currently, "negotiation" means give the contractor what they ask for. I have even seen the price increased in a few instances even when the contractor did not ask for a higher price. No joking!