"Harmony!" between POGO, Clay Johnson, and the IGs

The federal inspectors general convened this week in Newport News, Virginia, for their annual conference. Very nearly all the 64 statutory IGs proved their mettle by braving a tornado and making it down there for three days of panels on issues important to the community.

Among other panels, the IGs heard from two Congressional staffers on the status of pending legislation that would bring the most important changes to the IG law in 20 years (the law will be 30 years old this October).  But alas: the only panel we were allowed to attend was the one we were on.   

POGO Executive Director Danielle Brian and I were joined by the OMB Deputy Director for Management, Clay Johnson, for an hour and a half discussion of both our findings in our first report on IGs, that many lack the tools they need to be truly independent, as well as preliminary findings and conclusions reached for our second report, scheduled for release later this year, regarding IG accountability, performance and effectiveness.

Johnson began by repeating his oft-heard beliefs about IG-dom: that IGs should be respected but not feared.  He declared that the two most important attributes of a good IG are that he or she be "really professional" and also "really good at helping the agency be successful."   

Danielle gave some opening remarks and I gave a brief summary of the rationale behind our first report.  Danielle then raised the issue of recent attacks on the IG system as being "annoying" and part of the "fear industry" and argued it might not be a bad thing for IGs to be seen this way, since they should not be regarded as part of the management team at their agency.  She had just stated that there's a big difference between helping an agency work well, and making it look good, when Johnson burst in, demanding to know, "So who's doing that?"

Further discussion about whom IGs actually work for ensued, but Johnson flatly declared that it's the executive branch that hires and fires them, so that was that.  While the IG law does require reports to be submitted equally to the agency chief and the Congress, Johnson maintained, it is "forbidden at all costs" for an IG to have an informal relationship with Congress.   

Several voices from the IGs in the audience piped up, informing Johnson--apparently for the first time--that IGs frequently receive requests for studies (or "unfunded mandates," as one put it) from their Congressional oversight committees.  One IG noted that the IG law requires, as part of its independence provisions, that IGs keep the Congress "fully and currently informed" of pertinent issues.  He added pointedly that their boss, the entity to which the IGs are accountable, "would be the American people."

Another IG opined that not only must IGs be independent of their agencies' leadership, but that the IG "has no boss" in terms of directing what to investigate or audit, and how to go about it.

One slightly surreal moment arose toward the end of our session, when Johnson declared quite firmly that there has "not been one instance of an IG not having the independence needed to do a good job."  To your POGO team's disappointment, no one from the audience spoke up to deny the patently erroneous assertion--despite many of those people in the room having privately confided in us of their own experiences being chilled by their management.  It was left to us to give two examples of such interference that we felt confident discussing publicly.   

The panel ended shortly after I agreed with Johnson's statement that transparency about IGs' activities is important.  Whereupon Johnson threw his arms around Danielle and exclaimed, "Harmony!"

-- Beverley Lumpkin

Comments

My observation is that IGs are are only independent in their own minds and actions. If they take independent actions contrary to management's wishes they are dealt with. Other IGs take the easy road and don't "rock the boat", which can be contrary to their intended purpose. The proposed legislation is a joke. It will do nothing to cure the independence issue. Giving IGs a big pay raise won't make them more independent. In some instances it will be more of a waste of tax payers money. Reporting to Congress will do nothing to protect an IG's independence, unless Congress has the power and will to do something about it.

[Ken Huffman]

This is the same jibber jabber that's been going on in the IG community for 20 years - nothing ever changes. The taxpayer is still getting hosed.

great blog

[Connie the Contractor]

This is the very best blog entry ever posted by a POGO staffer. Beverley Lumpkin is national treasure. This posting should be considered for a Pulitzer Prize.