![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.302083333333333in" height="1.125in"}

# Legislative Bulletin.................................................October 3, 2007

**Contents:**

**H.R. 928 ---** Improving Government Accountability Act

H.R. 928--- Improving Government Accountability Act *(Cooper, D-TN)*

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Wednesday, October 3, subject to a structured rule
([H.Res. 701](http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.Res.701:)).
The RSC will summarize the amendments made in order under the rule in a
separate RSC document.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 928 would prohibit the removal of any
Inspectors General (IGs) without specific cause, establish term limits
for individuals serving as IGs, authorize IGs to submit budget requests
independently of the executive branch, establish the Inspectors General
Council, and establish new payment levels for IGs. The specific
provisions of the bill are as follows:

-   Specifies that IGs appointed by the President may **only be
    removed** from office prior to the expiration of their term in the
    case of permanent incapacity, inefficiency, neglect of duty,
    malfeasance, conviction of a felony, or conduct involving moral
    turpitude.

-   Specifies that IGs appointed by their agency heads in designated
    federal entities may not be removed or transferred without the
    agency head submitting the reasons for removal in writing to
    Congress at least 30 days prior.

-   Establishes a seven-year term for every IG and allows for IGs to
    serve more than one term. States that an individual appointed to
    fill a vacancy will serve a full seven-year term and allows an
    individual to serve as IG for up to one year after his or her term
    has expired while a replacement is appointed.

-   Authorizes IGs to submit their own appropriation estimate and budget
    request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and directly to
    Congress. The budget requests will be separate from and in addition
    to the individual agency's request (currently IG budgets are
    requested and appropriated through each agency).

-   Requires the President's budget to show each separate IG request and
    include a statement comparing the IG's requests to the requests of
    their respective agency.

-   Establishes the Inspectors General Council within the executive
    branch. The Council is made up of every IG and supplants the
    President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE), which
    oversees presidentially appointed IGs, and the Executive Council on
    Integrity and Efficiency (ECIC) which oversees IGs appointed by
    agency heads.

-   Requires that the Council elect a chair from among the IGs to serve
    for a period of two years. The chair will be responsible for
    appointing a vice chair, convening meetings, carrying out the duties
    of the Council, and making payments to carry out the Council's
    duties.

-   Requires the Council to continually review federal programs
    vulnerable to waste, fraud, and abuse, conduct inter-agency audits
    and investigations, maintain a website, establish one or more
    academies to train auditors and investigators, and submit reports to
    Congress per the chair's request.

-   Establishes the Integrity Committee within the Council, headed by
    the IG of the FBI, for the purpose of investigating allegations of
    wrongdoing that are made against IGs and senior-level staff.

-   Prohibits IGs from receiving any cash awards or bonuses and
    increases the annual rate of basic pay for presidentially appointed
    IGs from level IV of the Executive Schedule (\$145,400 in 2007) to
    level III plus three percent (\$159,238). In addition, IGs appointed
    by their agency heads in designated federal entities will be paid at
    a level comparable to other senior staff members of the agency plus
    3 percent.

-   Provides that IGs will be the considered the "agency head" with
    respect to [Senior Executive Service](http://www.opm.gov/ses/),
    [Voluntary Separation
    Authority](http://www.opm.gov/employ/html/vsi.htm), and law
    enforcement officer retirement exemptions and that the IGs will
    determine nominees for Presidential Rank Awards for Inspector
    General personnel.

-   Expands the IGs power to subpoena to included electronic information
    as well as any "tangible thing" (hard drives and computers).

-   Authorizes all IGs to apply to the Department of Justice to deputize
    their agents and authorize them to obtain warrants, make arrests,
    and carry firearms (currently only presidentially appointed IGs may
    do so).

-   Authorizes the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration's
    agents to provide armed escorts to protect the physical security of
    IRS employees.

-   Expands the power of the Comptroller General to administer oaths and
    accept sworn testimony and requires the Comptroller General to
    assess the overall degree of cooperation between agencies and the
    Government Accountability Office (GAO).

-   Authorizes IGs appointed by their agency heads in designated federal
    entities to pursue false claims and recoup losses from fraud
    (currently only presidentially appointed IGs are authorized to do
    so).

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: The Inspector General Act of
1978 established a series of independent Inspectors General (IGs) that
answer to the President and operate within executive departments and
agencies. IGs function as supervisory bodies within the agency,
conducting audits and investigations to prevent government waste, fraud,
and abuse. Since their creation, IGs have conducted investigations and
audits that have led to countless prosecutions, debarments, and
suspensions. According to [House Report
110-354](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr354)),
audits and investigations conducted by IGs resulted in \$9.9 billion in
potential savings and \$6.8 billion in investigative recoveries in 2006
alone.

There are currently 58 Offices of Inspector General (OIGs) operating
under the authorization of the IG bill. Each IG is appointed to his or
her position either by President, with confirmation in the Senate, or by
the respective agency. Currently, 29 IGs are presidential appointees and
29 have been appointed by their agency. In 1992, [Executive Order
12805](http://www.ignet.gov/pande/exorder.html) was signed to coordinate
and enhance the efforts of individual IGs by establishing the
President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency
([PCIE](http://www.ignet.gov/pande/pmembers1.html)) and the Executive
Council on Integrity and Efficiency
([ECIE](http://www.ignet.gov/pande/emembers1.html)). The PCIE is made up
of presidentially appointed IGs, while the ECIE consists of all
agency-appointed IGs. Under the terms of the Executive Order, a PCIE IG
may only be removed from office by the President, while an ECIE IG may
be removed by the head of the presiding agency. In either case, the
President or the agency head must give Congress notice and an
explanation before an IG may be removed.

According to [House Report
110-354](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr354)),
a number of recent events have called into question the independence and
accountability of IGs and have led to this legislation. Incidents that
have called into question IGs position as a neutral supervisor include:

-   Department of State Inspector General Howard Krongard allegedly
    interfered with numerous department investigations. The House Report
    suggests that "Krongard's strong affinity with State Department
    leadership, support for the current administration, and partisan
    political ties have led him to halt investigations, censor reports,
    and refuse to cooperate with law enforcement agencies." To read
    more, [click
    here](http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-probe29sep29,1,165852.story?coll=la-headlines-nation).

-   Current NASA Inspector General Robert Cobb allegedly intimidated and
    punished his own staff for investigating allegations of theft and
    safety violations.

-   Department of Commerce Inspector General Johnnie Frazier, who
    retired in June 2007, was under investigation for taking vacations
    with taxpayer dollars. To read more, [click
    here](http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/09/withheld-report.html).

-   Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Inspector General Kirt West was
    considered for dismissal after conducting investigations into the
    LSC traveling expenses.

Despite the Committee's contention that this legislation is needed to
address these problems, the Administration views H.R. 928 as a
usurpation of constitutionally granted executive authority. The portion
of the bill that prohibits the removal of IGs without cause would take
away the President's power to appoint and remove IGs as he sees fit. In
the Administration's estimation, this would intrude on the President's
ability to hold IGs accountable for their performance. The
Administration also believes that allowing IGs to submit their budget
requests directly to Congress would supersede a longstanding process
that gives the executive branch full control of its budget request.
Further, the Administration opposes the bill's provision that combines
the PCIE and the ECIE into one independent Council.

**[RSC Bonus Fact]{.underline}**: According to CQ, IG offices employed
more than 12,000 employees and had an appropriated budget of \$2 billion
in FY 2006.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 928 was introduced on February
28, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform, Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and
Procurement on March 23, 2007. On August 2, 2007, a mark-up was held and
the bill was reported, in the nature of a substitute, by voice vote.

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}: Some conservatives may
be concerned that a provision in the bill which permits the President to
remove Inspectors General only with cause intrudes on the President's
responsibility to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," as
prescribed in Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. In
addition, some conservatives may be concerned that H.R. 928 would
circumvent traditional budgetary procedure by allowing Inspectors
General to submit budget requests to Congress independently of the
executive branch and their respective agency.**

**[Administration Position]{.underline}**: According to a Statement of
Administration Policy (SAP), issued on October 1, 2007, the
Administration strongly objects to provisions in the bill that prohibit
the removal of IGs without specific cause, authorize IGs to submit
budget requests to Congress independently, and combine the PCIE and the
ECIE into the Inspectors General Council. According to the SAP, "If H.R.
928 were presented to the President in its current form, the President's
senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill." To read the
entire SAP, [click
here](http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/legislative/sap/110-1/hr928sap-r.pdf).

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, implementing H.R.
928 would cost \$11 million in FY 2008 and \$75 million of the FY 2008
-- FY 2012 period (subject to appropriation).

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}**: The Oversight and
Government Reform Committee, in [House Report
110-354](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr354)),
asserts that, "H.R. 928 contains no earmarks, limited tax benefits, or
limited tariff benefits."

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Oversight and Government
Reform Committee, in [House Report
110-354](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr354))
cites constitutional authority in Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 (the
congressional power to make all laws necessary and proper for executing
the foregoing powers), but fails to cite a foregoing power to which this
clause refers. House Rule XIII, Section 3(d)(1), requires that all
committee reports contain "a statement citing the *specific* *powers*
granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the
bill or joint resolution." *\[emphasis added\]*

[Note]{.underline}: Article VI, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution states
that, "The Senators and Representatives...and all executive and judicial
Officers...shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this
Constitution."

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

\###