From: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu (Rich Winkel)
Subject: CENSORED: WHO'S OVERSEEING CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: PACH
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 09:15:24 GMT

WHO'S OVERSEEING CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT?

Oversight is one of Congress's chief responsibilities, along with
writing laws, raising revenue and spending public money.  So why is it
that on the whole, Congress is failing that responsibility, allowing
waste, fraud and abuse to go unchecked throughout the federal
bureaucracy?  A National Academy of Public Administration report once
charged it's because "Congressional oversight in general is more geared
to garnering media attention" than making government work better.
According to current and former Congressional investigators, the
oversight process today is in a shambles; many investigations are
superficial and scattershot at best.  Too many lawmakers are am-
bivalent about oversight and subject to pressure from the targets of
their investigations.  Sources within federal agencies have withered;
many whistleblowers, no longer nurtured by Congress, remain silent.

No better (or worse) example can be found than the Government Op-
erations Committee -- designed to be the House of Representatives' most
tenacious government watchdog.  The committee has floundered since Rep.
John Conyers (D-Mich.) replaced the tough Rep.  Jack Brooks (D-Texas),
who had chaired the committee for 13 years.  "We have 360-degree
authority to pursue waste, fraud and abuse," says committee member
Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), "we should strike fear in the hearts of
bureaucrats and contractors.  But nobody's afraid.  "

Sources on and off Conyers' committee say the chairman, who has
solicited and received contributions from a number of parties with a
stake in his committee's investigations, isn't aggressive or focused
enough.  The 14-term lawmaker, in one insider's words, tends to
"accommodate the people being investigated rather than the
investigators."  In fact, Conyers' accommodating nature cost 15-year
congressional investigator Tom Trimboli his job -- for doing his job too
well.  This is the same man who played a key role in un-covering the
Wedtech scandal.  The same man Conyers called "as good as they get' --
six months before dismissing him.

The dismissal was the result of a committee investigation, led by
Trimboli, of the Unisys corporation,, major defense contractor.
Trimboli was looking into charges that Unisys was defrauding the
government in a $ I .7 billion computer contract they had won with the
Air Force.  It took only one unhappy phone call to Rep.  Conyers from
Unisys Chair Michael Blumenthal before Trimboli was fired, paralyzing
the Unisys investigation.  To this date, no hearings have been held
and no final committee report has been issued

The sad state of congressional oversight is best summarized by 30- year
veteran investigator Don Gray, who recently left the Hill.  According to
Gray, seldom heard are the sweetest words a lawmaker can say to an
investigator:  "Take it where it goes.  I'll back you up all the way."

(SSU CENSORED RESEARCHER:  RACHAEL KlNBERG)

SOURCE:COMMON CAUSE 2030 M St.  NW, Washington, DC 20036

DATE:July/August 1991

Title:"See No Evil"

AUTHOR:Jeffrey Denny

COMMENTS:  Jeffrey Denny, senior editor at Common Cause, charges that
"The problem addressed in 'See No Evil' -- waste, fraud and abuse runs
largely unchecked through the federal government because Congress's
oversight function has been undermined by lawmakers' close rel-
ationship with special interests and federal agencies -- by its very
nature receives insufficient exposure in the mass media.  "The mass
media by and large views Congress's oversight committees as friendly
sources, ignoring the confluence of pressures -- i.e. lawmakers' need to
raise campaign money from special interests and win favors for
constituents from bureaucrats -- that undermine tough, effective
enforcement.  "Too often the mainstream media has been used by
publicity-seeking members of Congress whose 'investigations' are little
more than quick-hit press events.  When oversight efforts are reported,
key questions remain unasked:  Was the committee lobbied by the target
to ease up and what was the impact of the lobbying effort?  Did the
target provide campaign-contributions to members of the committee?
Did the committee use all its powers to compel testimony and documents
from the executive branch?  Were findings used to achieve action, such
as Justice Department prosecution?

"In three recent cases, the mass media missed a key angle in its
coverage of the HUD, S&L and Iran-contra scandals:  Where was Congress,
with all its oversight powers, while these scandals brewed?"

Denny says that more information about the failure of Congressional
oversight could "provoke Congress to make institutional -- and
attitudinal -- changes that will improve its ability to cover waste,
fraud and abuse -- perhaps improving public trust in government and
saving taxpayers money.''  As it is, Denny adds "Ultimately, special
interests that are ripping off government stand to benefit from the
lack of coverage of Congress's lax oversight.  So long as Congress
feels it can spoon-feed the press investigatory pabulum and fool the
public into believing it really is doing something about waste, fraud
and abuse, there will be no incentive for lawmakers to change."  He con-
cludes that the mass media no longer can think of Congress as a friendly
source, but "rather must hold it accountable as an elected branch of
government with a serious job to do.  "

Xref: sparky misc.activism.progressive:8312 alt.activism:18646