« Attorney Urges End to Investigation Into Coast Guard Whistleblower | Main | Northrop Wins KC-X Tanker Competition »

Feb 29, 2008

Comments

Ken Huffman

Danielle,

While several conclusions and recommendations in part 1 of POGO's IG review have merit, others fall so wide of the mark as to be laughable. Unfortunately, the essence of the report seems heavily premised on deceptive and self interested data gleaned from Semi-Annual IG reports to congress and from IG responses to POGO questionaires. No less than Rep. John Conyers told a PCIE conference in 1993 that no one on the Hill understands or cares about those semi-annual reports. That's good since neither congress or POGO should put much stock in their thoroughness or veracity - it's simply a checkoff item. Hopefully, part 2 of the POGO study which purportedly examines IG "accountability, performance, and effectiveness" will clarify the basis for recommending that IG independence (and pay?) be enhanced - particularly at a time of glaring ineptitude throughout the IG community. By the way, does POGO want iincreases in IG pay linked to what IGs say they accomplish or to what IGs actually accomplish? Would you like IG pay equivalent to cabinet members and Supreme Court judges or is that too low? Should congress perhaps add statutory language requiring IG conduct to be "legal and ethical"? This might at least prompt some PCIE IG's to have their personal legal counsel look up definitions for legal and ethical. The IGs can ask their personal legal counsel to read and explain the definitions. Then it's lunch time.

The comments to this entry are closed.