The Improving Government Accountability Act
On September 27, 2008, the House passed the final version of the Improving Government Accountability Act, H.R. 928, which was signed into law on October 14, 2008. This bill contains a number of provisions to enhance the effectiveness and independence of Inspectors General. It also contains provisions to enhance the accountability of the Inspector General system overall.
Inspectors General play a vital role for the U.S. taxpayer – working to prevent and detect waste, fraud and abuse in federal programs. Inspectors General serve as the principal watchdogs of the nation’s major federal agencies and are responsible for conducting audits and investigations in an effort to prevent and detect waste, fraud and abuse in their agencies’ programs. In 2006 alone, audits by Inspector General offices resulted in potential savings from audit recommendations of $9.9 billion and criminal recoveries of $6.8 billion. To effectively carry out their mission, Inspectors General must be independent and objective, which requires that they be insulated from improper management and political pressure.
This bill takes several steps to enhance the effectiveness and independence of Inspectors General. First, the bill gives Inspectors General fixed seven-year terms, which is designed to better insulate Inspectors General from political retribution. Second, under the bill, Inspectors General, who now serve at the pleasure of their appointing authorities, could be terminated before the end of their terms only for cause, based on such factors as malfeasance, permanent disability, inefficiency, neglect of duty, or conviction of a felony. Third, the bill authorizes Inspectors General to send copies of their budget requests to Congress and OMB directly, to deter officials in their respective agencies from slashing their funding in retaliation for unfavorable audits.
There is also a concern about recent possible misconduct by certain Inspectors General, such as the State Department’s Inspector General. In addition to ensuring that Inspectors General have the appropriate independence, it is also important to ensure that Inspectors General themselves are held accountable. For example, recent concerns have been raised about the conduct of the Inspector General at the State Department. As the Washington Post (9/29/07) recently reported, seven current and former members of the State Department’s Inspector General office have alleged that Inspector General Howard Krongard has repeatedly thwarted investigations into alleged contract fraud in Iraq and Afghanistan, including refusing to send investigators to Iraq and Afghanistan to investigate $3 billion worth of State Department contracts. These employees allege that Krongard’s partisan political ties have led him to thwart these investigations in order to protect the Bush Administration from political embarrassment.
As a result, the bill also contains provisions to enhance the accountability of the Inspector General system overall. The bill contains provisions to better hold Inspectors General themselves accountable and to provide a mechanism for investigating and resolving allegations of misconduct by Inspectors General. For example, the bill creates an Inspectors General Council and requires the Council to appoint an Integrity Committee, chaired by the Council’s FBI representative. This Integrity Committee shall investigate any allegations of wrongdoing made against Inspectors General or their senior staff members and report substantiated allegations to the executive branch. Reports of Integrity Committee investigations must be submitted to both the Executive Chairperson of the Council and to Congress.