The Project On Government Oversight (POGO) Blog

The Parties Versus the People: An Interview with Mickey Edwards

 

Former U.S. Rep. Mickey Edwards.

The Parties Versus the People by Mickey Edwards. Available now from Yale Press.

By ANNA MEIER

With a dismal record of passing legislation, perpetuated by hyper-partisan gridlock, the 112^th Congress has been called the “worst Congress ever.” Some prefer to stop at “dysfunctional,” but whichever nickname you choose, there’s something seriously off about Congress these days.  Bills are proposed with the goal of advancing partisan interests, and not necessarily the public’s. Debates have deginerated into bitter partisan bickering, not thoughtful consideration of public policy.

In such an environment, it’s natural to search for someone to blame. But according to former Congressman Mickey Edwards, who spent many years as a member of the Republican leadership, the problem in Congress isn’t its members—it’s the system itself.

Fortunately, it’s not beyond repair. In his new book, The Parties Versus the People: How to Turn Democrats and Republicans into Americans, Edwards, who served 16 years in the U.S. House of Representatives representing Oklahoma's 5th Congressional District, lays out the features of the American political order that make it easy for parties to seek power over the public interest.

In order to combat cronyism and get Congress back on track, he proposes sweeping changes to our political system, from ending party-controlled primaries to eliminating corporate donations to candidates. We caught up with Edwards to talk about provoking accountability, moving beyond labels, and encouraging a more effective Congress.

POGO: You've said that partisanship, not polarization, is to blame for dysfunction in and frustration with government today. Can you explain the difference?

Mickey Edwards: Polarization is a natural part of the democratic process; there are more than 300 million of us and a lot of different viewpoints, some of them very strongly held.  A democracy depends on a vigorous exchange between those alternative visions.  Some of the greatest advances in our history have come not from the political center but from the “poles,” including the civil rights movement and the women’s movement, both of which were radical reversals of long-held practices and beliefs.

Partisanship, on the other hand, is the taking of political positions that seem advantageous to one’s political club. Today, neither Democrats nor Republicans are open to proposals—no matter what their merits—that emanate from a member of the other party. The democratic process requires a willingness to engage honestly in an exchange of views, with an openness to considering an opponent’s perspective; partisanship cuts off that exchange and proceeds solely from a cold political calculus that depends on hurting the other side in order to gain an advantage in the next election. The two terms—polarization and partisanship—are often confused, but they are very different.

Congress Questions Whether Futures Industry Can Reliably Regulate Itself after Latest Scandals

By MARY PENG and MICHAEL SMALLBERG

In the wake of two colossal market scandals, several members of Congress have raised doubts about the government’s reliance on the futures industry to regulate itself.

“I’m struggling to understand why we continue to support this [self-regulatory organization] model of regulation when we seem to have one large-scale process failure after another,” said Rep. David Scott (D-Ga) at a July 25 hearing.

At the same hearing, Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.) complained to a federal regulator that “we’re relying on outside groups to determine the effectiveness of your regulatory system.”

There has been heightened scrutiny of the futures industry following the revelation that Peregrine Financial Group, a futures broker, had allegedly been defrauding clients for as long as two decades. Just eight months earlier, another futures broker, MF Global, filed for bankruptcy after more than $1 billion in client funds went missing.

Have the Pentagon, State Department, and USAID Learned From Their Mistakes in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Dudley Moore: Do you feel you’ve learnt by your mistakes here?

Peter Cook (as Sir Arthur Streeb-Greebling): I think I have, yes, and I think I can probably repeat them almost perfectly.

~British comedians Dudley Moore and Peter Cook, from “The Frog and Peach” sketch (1966)

It’s been almost a year since the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan issued its final report to Congress on the state of U.S. reconstruction efforts in those two countries. In addition to its blockbuster finding that between $31 billion and $60 billion was lost to waste and fraud, the final report, along with two earlier reports, made numerous recommendations on ways to improve contingency contracting.

Some recommendations pertained specifically to the three principal contracting agencies – the Departments of Defense (DoD) and State and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) –- and others were addressed to the executive departments in general. (A few months ago, the Project On Government Oversight blogged about the efforts of Sens. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) and Jim Webb (D-Va.) to implement some of the wartime contracting commission's recommendations to Congress. 

This week, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released an assessment of the extent to which the Defense and State departments, and USAID have acted on the commission's recommendations. The GAO found that DoD has taken or planned actions that directly align with about half of the contracting commission's recommendations applicable to it, while State and USAID have done so with regard to about one-third of the recommendations applicable to them. Of the remaining recommendations, the agencies took no action either because they claim existing policies or practices already address them or they just don’t agree with them.

McCain Spokesman: Senator is Proud of Ex Lockheed Lobbyist Appointed to Defense Oversight Role

POGO STAFF REPORT

The former Lockheed executive and lobbyist who Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) appointed to a key role overseeing the defense industry took the job only temporarily, a spokesman for McCain said.

The Project On Government Oversight reported Thursday that McCain, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, hired former Lockheed vice president Ann Elise Sauer to head the committee’s Republican staff.  As POGO noted, the committee oversees military spending, including major weapons systems that are central to Lockheed’s business.

In a financial disclosure form, Sauer listed almost $1.7 million of compensation from Lockheed during a reporting period spanning 2011 and early 2012.

In a statement to POGO after Thursday’s article was posted, McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said Sauer took early retirement from Lockheed in January 2011, which accounted for part of her compensation.

Fast and Furious? More Like Slow and Painful

As the dust settles on the U.S. House of Representatives' vote to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress (which followed the White House invoking executive privilege to prevent the release of documents), I've watched the events unfold from the sidelines in pain.

Whenever you recognize someone for their service or achievement, there's always the chance that award recipients will turn around and disappoint even some of their most fervent fans. In 2010 and 2011, the Project On Government Oversight (POGO) ran this risk when we chose to publicly recognize both House Government Affairs and Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa and President Barack Obama for promoting open government, oversight and accountability.

Sadly, nothing in the sorry episode advances the causes that Issa and Obama championed. Having given awards to both men for their commitment to good government and open government respectively, I feel compelled to say something.

New Legislation Would Give Public Full Access to Congressional Reports

By DANA LIEBELSON

A bipartisan group of representatives introduced a bill Wednesday that would give the public unprecedented access to valuable congressional reports.

Taxpayers pour over $100 million into the Congressional Research Service (CRS) each year but aren’t allowed access to its work. CRS compiles expert advice, and produces nonpartisan briefs for Members of Congress and their staff. These reports cover everything from international terrorist issues, to Food and Drug Administration oversight, to military space programs—many issues that are important to voters.

The Congressional Research Service Electronic Accessibility Resolution was introduced by Rep. Lance Leonard (R-N.J.) and is cosponsored by Reps. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.), Timothy V. Johnson (R-Ill.), Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).

Lt. Col. Daniel Davis to Speak at Hill Press Conference and Panel Discussion

Lt. Col. Daniel Davis served two deployments in Afghanistan.

By BRYAN RAHIJA

Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Davis, the man who risked his career to raise credible challenges about the Pentagon's rosy depictions of progress in the Afghan war, finally has an opportunity to speak to Congress and the public. The 17-year Army veteran and Ridenhour award-winner is set to give his analysis to Members of Congress today at a 2:00 p.m. press conference and panel discussion.

In his prepared remarks, Davis asked why congressional leaders had not done more to get to the bottom of what conditions were like in the war-torn country:

With all appropriate respect and honor to this body, I must again ask: how could it be that not one committee or sub-committee chairman or chairwoman in the entire United States Congress finds the matter of sufficient importance that they will take action to ascertain the truth?

Davis made headlines back in February after the Armed Forces Journal published a bombshell of an op-ed he wrote titled "Truth, lies and Afghanistan." In the piece, Davis argued that the public wasn't getting the full story about Afghanistan:

Sen. Warner and Rep. Kinzinger Have "Grave Concerns" About F-22, Say Air Force Has Taken "Appropriate First Step

By DANA LIEBELSON

Nine people involved with the F-22, most of them pilots, have told Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) and Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) about problems with the aircraft, the Members of Congress told reporters on Tuesday after a briefing with the Air Force.

“We have grave concerns and we have a lot of questions that still needs answers” Rep. Kinzinger said. “But we are confident the Air Force will work with us to get those questions answered.”

The lawmakers, who recently sent a letter to the Air Force requesting further investigation into the F-22, emphasized the importance of ensuring the safety of the F-22 pilots and flight sergeants who choose to come forward, particularly for pilot Josh Wilson who still has a letter of reprimand from the Air Force hanging over his head.

POGO Investigator Testifies Before Congress on Inspector General Vacancies

Right: POGO Investigator Jake Wiens, photo by House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

By DANA LIEBELSON

When the President fails to nominate the watchdogs who expose government wrongdoing, how can Congress ensure that taxpayers are getting the oversight they deserve? That was the question legislators sought to answer yesterday morning at a House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing.

POGO Investigator Jake Wiens testified at the hearing (his very first congressional testimony—woo hoo!) on the importance of promptly nominating permanent Inspectors General (IGs). Wiens is the mastermind behind POGO’s new website “Where Are All the Watchdogs?” which tracks the number and length of IG vacancies.

“POGO firmly believes that the effectiveness of an IG office can be diminished when that office does not have permanent leadership, especially when that vacancy exists for an extended period of time,” Wiens said in his opening statement.

At present, 10 of the 73 Inspector General positions are vacant. Eight of these positions require nomination by President Obama. The longest vacancy is at the State Department, where the IG office has now been without permanent leadership for almost 1,600 days.

“The president has had more than three years to make a recommendation…why hasn’t he made a decision on this? Aren’t there plenty of competent people that can do the job?” said Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN), referring to the State Department vacancy. Burton is a former chairman for the House oversight committee.

Current Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) pointed out that the hearing on IG vacancies was not held in order to reflect upon the Obama Administration— but to instead determine how best to ensure that future administrations nominate IGs in a prompt manner.

New Video: Danielle Brian Talking Government Oversight on C-SPAN

By ANDRE FRANCISCO

On Sunday, POGO Executive Director Danielle Brian was on C-SPAN's Washington Journal to talk about the costs and complexities of government oversight, especially in light of the recent conference scandal at the General Services Administration (GSA). She took some interesting questions from callers about President Obama, Rep. Darrell Issa (D-CA), Inspectors General, and the problems holding up oversight in government. Check out the video!

Andre Francisco is POGO's Online Producer

Follow @andrefrancisco

From Comfort Capsules to Human Trafficking, Schwellenbach's Investigations 'Ahead of the Curve'

By DANA LIEBELSON

The "comfort capsules," as the Air Force so aptly dubbed them, had everything a discriminating world traveler could want: swiveling leather chairs, couches, wall-to-wall carpeting and a 37-inch flat-screen video monitor with stereo speakers, as well as other amenities a four-star general might need when flying on Uncle Sam's dime.

Heck, the chairs were even re-upholstered from brown to “Air Force blue” at a cost to taxpayers of $21,000 per four chairs. While the Air Force was spending millions of taxpayer dollars on these capsules, men and women on the frontlines were flying on torn-up netting.

After a Project On Government Oversight (POGO) investigation exposed the details in the summer of 2008, top military officials sputtered denials, and the news outraged Congress, which had twice told the Pentagon that the money needed to be spent on “higher priority” needs. The New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Colbert Report all followed the story.

It was an investigation that further strengthened POGO’s reputation as a Pentagon watchdog and helped make a name for Nick Schwellenbach, the 26-year-old  POGO national security investigator who unearthed the scandal.

For Schwellenbach, whose last day as POGO’s director of investigations is this week, exposing the comfort capsules was one of the highlights of his career, which has included investigating the failures of the military whistleblower protection system, spurring reforms in how the U.S. deals with human trafficking, and exposing cost overruns in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter—among other things.

Senate Judiciary Committee Talks FOIA and the Public's Right to Know

By SUZANNE DERSHOWITZ

Held during Sunshine Week, last Tuesday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, "The Freedom of Information Act: Safeguarding Critical Infrastructure Information and the Public’s Right to Know," was timely indeed. A wide range of issues were discussed, from the multi-agency FOIA portal scheduled to launch October 1 to the cybersecurity legislation pending in both the Senate and the House. The broad scope of topics covered perhaps illustrated the need for more hearings about FOIA and open government issues.

Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT), a longtime champion of FOIA and open government, said that “excessive government secrecy can come at an unacceptable price.” Last year, POGO and partners urged Congress to fix the over-broad and ill-defined provision relating to critical infrastructure information (CII) that the Department of Defense (DoD) was seeking in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2012. Sen. Leahy and Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) were successful in narrowing the blanket exemption to FOIA for CII. Their amendment requires DoD not to use FOIA’s CII exemption in cases where the public interest outweighs national security concerns. Jerry Ensminger’s testimony about the latest developments in the cover-up at Camp Lejeune demonstrated that more work needs to be done to ensure implementation of the law.

Witnesses on the first panel included Miriam Nisbet, director of the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) and Melanie Pustay, Director of Information Policy (OIP) at the Department of Justice (DOJ). In addition to managing DOJ’s FOIA administration, OIP is responsible for encouraging and overseeing agency compliance with FOIA and for ensuring that the President’s FOIA Memorandum is fully implemented across the government. 

Sen. Grassley (R-IA) said that the President’s promise to build the most transparent administration in history has not translated into meaningful open government reform. Sen. Grassley pointed to the DOJ winning the Rosemary Award for worst open government performance in 2011.

Sens. Grassley and Leahy were clearly exasperated that Congress hadn’t received OGIS’s recommendations for improving agency compliance with FOIA. Nisbet said OGIS submitted recommendations to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review over a year ago. "We haven’t received them yet,” said Leahy. “The law requires us to receive them. When will we receive them?"  He then offered to drive over to OMB to pick the recommendations up himself. When pressed, Nisbet promised to get “something” to Congress within a month.