Potential conflicts of interest for prospective Treasury Dept. employees

Wall Street, New York, NY.
Image via WikipediaGovernment reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From: Government Bytes

Confict of Interest in the Bailout Implementation?

Posted by Demian Brady - October 04, 2008

The Washington Post reports on Paulson's likely choices to manage the bailout's implementation, and lo and behold, the same people who were involved in the investment banks' decisions to pour money into the now toxic mortgage-based securities will be the Secretary's go-to-guys. After all, they are the experts.

Speculation was rampant on Wall Street yesterday about who Treasury would hire to manage the assets that the government plans to buy. Industry sources say the department has asked leading Wall Street firms for feedback and that Legg Mason, Pimco, BlackRock and MKP Capital Management were recommended to Treasury.

These firms rose to the top of the list because of their expertise in mortgage-related assets. But hiring them as asset managers for the government would raise the potential for conflicts of interest, particularly because they would be managing the assets while also selling their own troubled securities to the government.

But rest assured, Treasury "plans to develop and publish guidance on 'how to manage any conflicts.'"


>All Things Reform Mobile: allthingsreform.mofuse.mobi >Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 (not toll-free) >US House/Senate Mobile: bit.ly/members >Contact your reps tips: bit.ly/dear >Shortened All Things Reform URL: bit.ly/dw

Related articles by Zemanta

• Tell your congress members to support strong whistleblower rights for government employees

Sphere: Related Content

Government Accountability Office: EPA's chemical safety database far behind schedule

Government Accountability Office.
Image via WikipediaGovernment reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From: OMB Watch

EPA's Assessments of Chemical Dangers -- Too Slow

A government investigation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) process for assessing dangerous chemicals concludes the agency is so slow and lacking in credibility that the system is in "serious risk of becoming obsolete."

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) completed a new extensive review of EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), a publicly searchable database for studies and information on the human health effects of chemical substances. The GAO investigation concluded that recent EPA changes to the IRIS assessment process had made a bad situation worse.

This database is a significant tool to protect public health and the environment. Health risk assessments made using IRIS data directly influence the development of public health policies. The EPA's IRIS program is supposed to assess more than 540 chemicals now in the IRIS database, but from 2006 to 2007, it finalized evaluations of only four chemicals. At that rate, it will take almost three centuries to complete the assessments, assuming no new chemicals will require evaluation between now and then. The agency is also supposed to reevaluate old decisions to incorporate new scientific data.

EPA has a significant backlog of chemical assessments and a growing number of outdated assessments. The GAO reports that assessments of certain, especially dangerous chemicals, such as dioxin and trichloroethylene (TCE), the most frequently reported contaminant in groundwater, have been in progress for over 17 years and over 10 years, respectively. Unlike many other EPA programs that have statutory requirements, the IRIS program has no required deadlines.

In April, EPA released its new assessment process. The new process was not made available for public comment. This lack of transparency and public feedback occurred despite Office of Management and Budget (OMB) assurances that EPA would circulate a draft to the public before moving forward with the final process. Changes included one apparently demanded by OMB, which allows other agencies, including OMB, to comment on IRIS assessments. The comments from OMB and other federal agencies about the scientific assessments will not be made public nor be noted in any peer review process. Additionally, EPA changed the definition of the scientific assessment process to include policy considerations, where previously, science and policy were distinct.

GAO's Sept. 18 testimony before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations indicated that EPA's new procedures have failed to improve the program. Several factors contributed to the failure, including the fact that OMB and several other federal agencies now have an even larger role in evaluating the EPA's work, slowing down the process.

Under EPA's current IRIS procedures, OMB, as well as several other federal agencies, may intercede in the scientific assessment process multiple times. The comments and changes to the IRIS assessments made by these interceding agencies are not revealed to the public. In the GAO's analysis, this lack of transparency violates the principles of sound scientific analysis. Moreover, these federal agencies are often affected by IRIS assessments, which poses an apparent conflict of interest.

Another IRIS problem identified by GAO is that EPA management decisions to postpone completion of assessments to wait for more scientific analyses compound existing delays. Several of EPA's assessments are essentially stuck in a loop where the evaluation process stretches out over several years, during which time the scientific research used in the initial assessment becomes outdated, and the agency starts a new evaluation to incorporate more recent information. This cycle, combined with the new, longer evaluation process, is largely responsible for the significant delays in finalizing risk assessments, according to GAO. Without risk assessments, policymakers at the federal and state levels — and even in other countries — are not able to make informed risk management decisions.

For instance, in 2005 in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provided trailers to those without housing, which caused health problems because of high levels of formaldehyde. FEMA officials cited the lack of a standard for formaldehyde exposure in mobile homes as one of the problems that delayed action. Apparently, EPA had initiated an assessment of formaldehyde in 1997 to update the data in IRIS, but the process had not been completed by 2005 when FEMA took action. Instead, EPA chose to rely on an industry-funded assessment of formaldehyde, which projected the risk from the chemical to be 2,400 times lower than that determined in studies by the National Cancer Institute and the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, according to the GAO analysis.

At the hearing, EPA officials defended the program. Dr. George Gray, EPA's assistant administrator for research and development, cited increased staff levels and funding for the IRIS program. He also stated that there would be no way to conduct "scientific shenanigans" with the IRIS process because of existing independent peer reviews. Marcus Peacock, EPA's deputy administrator, also proclaimed that EPA "[does not] tolerate political interference with science."


>All Things Reform Mobile: allthingsreform.mofuse.mobi >Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 (not toll-free) >US House/Senate Mobile: bit.ly/members >Contact your reps tips: bit.ly/dear >Shortened All Things Reform URL: bit.ly/dw

Related articles by Zemanta

• GAO: Big disaster would overwhelm aid groups
• Official: CDC Late on FEMA Trailers
• Tell your congress members to support strong whistleblower rights for government employees

Sphere: Related Content

Critical Social Security Admin. computers to go offline during voter registration peak

Image via WikipediaGovernment reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From: AlterNet

October Surprise: Goverment Computers To Go Offline During Voter Registration Peak

By Wendy Weiser, Brennan Center for Justice

Posted on September 25, 2008

A recent alert by the Social Security Administration announces that the agency plans to shut down its databases for maintenance from October 11 through October 13. While this might not sound like an election issue, it turns out that this could significantly impede registration of first-time voters as well as the re-registration of eligible citizens.

Here's why. A 2002 federal law, the Help America Vote Act, requires all states to "coordinate" their voter registration databases with the Social Security database (and state motor vehicle databases) for the purpose of processing new voter registration forms. For the millions of voters who do not have current driver's licenses and register using the last four digits of their Social Security numbers, state election officials are required to try to match their voter registration information against Social Security records. But if the Social Security database is down—as it will be for four days—they won't be able to do that. Across the country, the processing of these voter registration forms will grind to a halt for four days.

Normally, a delay of three days would not have a major impact. But this delay is scheduled to take place three weeks before the November 4 election—a time when election officials in every state will be scampering to try to process the millions of new voter registrations they receive. With only 25 days to process millions of new voter registrations, while doing dozens of other things to prepare for what is shaping up to be the highest turnout election in decades, a loss of three days can spell disaster.

Even without this delay, there are already significant concerns that our overworked and under-resourced election officials will not be able to process all the new voter registrations this year in time for the election. Voter registration numbers are skyrocketing. Election officials are already feeling the strain, and it will only get worse. In every election, there is a huge spike in voter registrations in the period right before the voter registration deadline. Florida, for example, typically receives between 13 and 20% of its new voter registrations in the week before the deadline. In short, this shutdown is planned for the worst possible time, a time when every minute counts.

If the shutdown goes as planned, it will seriously impair the ability of states to process new voter registrations before the November 4 election. Who would this impact? New voters, as well as people who re-register because they have moved, who do not have state-issued driver's licenses or non-driver's IDs. Those citizens are disproportionately older, African-American, and low-income, studies show.

Fortunately, the solution to this potential disaster is easy: postpone the shutdown until after the election. And next time, look at the calendar before deciding when to turn off a database relied on by millions.

(Editor's note: On Tuesday, September 23rd, Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) and chairwoman of the Senate committee overseeing elections, wrote to the Social Security Administration, asking the agency to defer its database maintenance until after the November election.)

Wendy Weiser directs the Brennan Center’s work on voting rights and elections. During the run-up to the 2004 and 2006 elections, she masterminded litigation and advocacy efforts that kept hundreds of thousands of voters from being disenfranchised.

© 2008 Brennan Center for Justice All rights reserved.

>All Things Reform Mobile: allthingsreform.mofuse.mobi >Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 (not toll-free) >US House/Senate Mobile: bit.ly/members >Contact your reps tips: bit.ly/dear >Shortened All Things Reform URL: bit.ly/dw

Related articles by Zemanta

• Republicans Ramp up Voter Disenfranchisement Efforts Ahead of November Election
• Voter registration drive guides for all 50 states and D.C.
• This is National Voter Registration Month- do your part today!
• Free 2008 Voter's Self Defense Manuals from Project Vote Smart

Sphere: Related Content

On bailouts, Congress should move with great care

US House Financial Services Committee.
Image via WikipediaGovernment reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From: OMB Watch

Commentary: On Bailouts, Congress Should Move with Great Care

The pace at which Congress is considering the largest intervention into financial markets in the history of the United States, if not the world, is shocking. Over the weekend, the Bush administration proposed legislation that would grant it the authority to buy up toxic financial assets in an amount equal to five percent of gross domestic product (GDP). The magnitude of the funds requisitioned is matched only by the administration's requested level of unchecked power and opacity in how it would execute this historic market intervention. Congress has responded with uncharacteristic haste, setting the stage for passage of monumentally flawed legislation that purports to fix a yet-undiagnosed problem in roughly one week.

We do not pretend to know whether a bailout is needed or, if one is needed, what size and scope it should be. But most assuredly, rushed actions will result in quick fixes without resolving underlying problems. If economists and financial experts are correct in their assessment of the economy, Congress would be well advised to take a collective breath, slow down, and begin the process of study and deliberation that legislation of this historic magnitude deserves. If the economic crisis is as severe as Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson now indicates, Congress can wait an extra week before adjourning or return during the final weeks of the election season to address this issue. That Democratic leaders Harry Reid (D-NV) and Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) have neglected to mitigate the hysteria induced by an impending adjournment date that could easily be postponed is baffling and frustrating. After all, addressing national priorities is precisely why they were elected.

Paulson's initial request to Congress would have hid the actions of the Treasury from the sight of not only the public, but also from Congress and the courts. Sec 2(b)(2) of Paulson's legislative text would give his department authority to enter into contracts "without regard to any other provision of law regarding public contracts." Sec. 8 would make "[d]ecisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act … non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." Paulson has agreed to modify these provisions, but it is a clear indicator that the administration has its sights set on virtually unchecked authority — much like what happened after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Congress would be wise to ensure that significant oversight and accountability structures are in place. If Paulson or his successor can make unilateral decisions about contracts, for example, it will likely raise conflicts of interest. The firms most able to help the government dispose of toxic assets are likely the firms that are seeking the government bailout. Congress must be wary of ceding authority to a unilateral actor with no assurances of safeguarding the public from conflicts of interest.

Paulson's proposal would do what advocates and watchdogs of all ideological stripes abhor: it would socialize the risks (and bad decisions) of capitalism while privatizing the rewards. The Bush administration's toxic asset buyout program would purchase from financial firms and individuals assets that are now worth significantly less than the original purchase price. The plan calls for the government to relieve the financial industry of hundreds of billions (potentially trillions) of dollars of bad debt without receiving anything in return from these firms. Nothing. No one knows what the size or value of these debts will be. Progressives complain the taxpayers get no equity in the companies that created the bad debt; conservatives complain about government interference in the free market. This issue is at the crux of a major philosophical debate about the role of capitalism as this country moves into the 21st century.

Without attaching strings to a bailout, Washington would place an additional $2,000 of debt on the shoulders of each man, woman, and child in the country while encouraging the foolish and greedy decisions of Wall Street. It was the poor decisions of investment bankers that put the nation's entire economy at risk; it would be nothing less than immoral to enable and reward their reckless behavior as millions of Americans find themselves unemployed, losing their homes, and struggling to pay for food and electricity.

With nary a witness heard nor public forum entertained, the chair of the Senate Banking Committee, Christopher Dodd (D-CT), working with his counterpart in the lower chamber, chair of the House Financial Services Committee Barney Frank (D-MA), had started circulating the outline of the legislation his committee is likely to offer. However, Republican ranking member on the Senate Banking Committee, Richard Shelby (R-AL), sensing the imprudent manner under which Congress is responding to the administration, believes "Congress must immediately undertake a comprehensive, public examination of the problem and alternative solutions rather than swiftly pass the current plan with minimal changes or discussion." Dodd's contribution is substantively promising, and Shelby's warning is well warranted and should be heeded. While things are shifting quickly, if a bailout is to occur, the legislation must adhere to the principles outlined in a letter co-authored by ACORN and the Campaign for America's Future, to which OMB Watch has signed on.

These guidelines include the set of principles that should be followed whenever Congress intervenes in the market:

* Ensure proper oversight will be conducted over the intervening agency
* Protect the taxpayer by ensuring that the federal government not only assumes the risks of a bailout, but also shares in the benefits
* Maintain a sensible regulatory framework under which assisted firms and individuals conduct business
* Hold individuals accountable for their irresponsible behavior

In addition to these guidelines, consideration should be given to aiding individual citizens who continue to struggle to stay in their homes. Above all, Congress must conduct its deliberations transparently and be wary of potential conflicts of interest of those that seek to influence the legislative outcome.

It was only four days ago that Paulson asked Congress to pass legislation that would allow his department to use $700 billion to purchase mountains of bad debt. That's five percent of the nation's total economic annual output, or to put it another way, that's even more than what has been spent on the war in Iraq. With so much riding on the decisions and actions that our leaders are about to make at this pivotal moment in our history, every American deserves more than five days of Congress's time. Perhaps now, more than any other time, elected officials, particularly Congress, need to do more than prop up our expectations with short-term solutions. Instead, they should develop a clear understanding of all the components that led to this crisis. Only then will proposed reforms have lasting impact and ensure this type of problem is not allowed to happen again. Let's hope our leaders make the prudent decision to slow the process down and devise a wise policy solution that benefits our entire society.


>All Things Reform Mobile: allthingsreform.mofuse.mobi >Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 (not toll-free) >US House/Senate Mobile: bit.ly/members >Contact your reps tips: bit.ly/dear >Shortened All Things Reform URL: bit.ly/dw

Related articles by Zemanta

• FBI eyes meltdown firms
• House turns up heat on Paulson
• Bernanke and Paulson: Congress Must Move Now

Sphere: Related Content

Minerals Management Service royalty-in-kind program corruption abounds

Seal of the Minerals Management Service.
Image via Wikipedia Government reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From: Project on Government Oversight (POGO)

September 17, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Danielle Brian or Mandy Smithberger, 202-347-1122

POGO ROYALTIES-IN-KIND REPORT: DRILLING THE TAXPAYER

Washington, D.C. – The Department of the Interior’s Minerals Management Service (MMS) continues their fatal attraction to the oil and gas industry, with no signs of the cozy relationship cooling. Last week’s salacious findings in the Department’s Inspector General report cited specific instances of corruption, inappropriate relationships, and conflicts of interest. A report being released today by the Project On Government Oversight illustrates that those scandals are only symptoms of a much larger problem in the royalty collection program.

For years, POGO has questioned the MMS royalties-in-kind (RIK) program. Royalties are the second largest source of federal revenue outside of Internal Revenue Service collections. Nearly half of those royalties are collected in kind—in the form of crude oil or natural gas—rather than in cash. The product is then sold in the marketplace, returning the proceeds to the Treasury. POGO’s report, the fifth in a series about royalties, tracks how industry’s influence on the RIK program has been pervasive, and can be traced from the program’s inception through its expansion into the full-blown program that exists today. POGO now demands the program be abolished. http://pogoarchives.org/m/ep/rik-report-reporter-draft-20080917.pdf; http://pogoarchives.org/m/ep/rik-appendices.pdf

“The IG tried to find evidence of a quid pro quo for the presents and trips given to government employees. Perhaps, the evidence was so big the IG missed it. The program itself is the gift industry wanted in return. It is clear from the facts that the gas and oil industry’s pals in MMS implemented a program tailored to the industry’s benefit, defended its unverifiable book-keeping, and expanded the program without any regard for good governance or accountability,” said Danielle Brian, POGO Executive Director.

POGO’s report found that the program is lacks standard taxpayer protections, avenues for public participation, regulations to explain the program, and professional audits, and is surrounded by secrecy.

Essentially, the RIK program asks taxpayers to trust that industry delivers the correct amount of oil or gas to the government in lieu of cash, but has reduced oversight to such a degree that the GAO labeled RIK’s management “an honor system.” “That honor system has failed, and it’s time to shut the program down,” stated Brian.

###

[No comments with original article]

>All Things Reform Mobile: allthingsreform.mofuse.mobi >Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 (not toll-free) >US House/Senate Mobile: bit.ly/members >Contact your reps tips: bit.ly/dear >Shortened All Things Reform URL: bit.ly/dw

Sphere: Related Content

USAspending.gov database behind in providing the public information

Government reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From: NextGov

Senator questions progress on federal spending Web site
By Gautham Nagesh, gnagesh@govexec.com 09/11/08

A Web site launched last fall to track federal spending has not followed the law to provide up-to-date information on government contracts and grants, while a new bill would increase the amount of information agencies would have to post online.

The site, USAspending.gov, was launched in 2007 to fulfill one of the requirements of the 2006 Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, which requires the Office of Management and Budget to maintain a site listing organizations that receive more than $25,000 in federal funds.

Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Barack Obama, D-Ill., co-sponsored the funding accountability act, and when the bill was introduced, Obama said the spending site would be "an important milestone on the path to greater government transparency."

The law requires agencies to submit every 30 days a report listing the groups issued grants and the amount of the grant. USASpending.gov's data quality page shows, however, that some agencies, including the Homeland Security, Labor, Transportation and Veterans Affairs departments have not updated grant information since last year.

"OMB did a good job of getting the USAspending.gov Web site up and running, but now agencies must step up and fulfill their duties as required by law," Coburn wrote in an e-mail statement. "The agencies that are not posting information on each grant and contract awarded are violating the law. The American public deserves to know how their tax dollars are being spent."

In July, Robert Shea, then OMB's associate director for administration and government performance, attributed the lapse to glitches in the data provided to OMB, rather than a reluctance by agencies to submit the information. "I'm satisfied agencies are doing the best they can," said Shea, who stepped down from his OMB position on Sept. 2. "Everybody is making every effort to comply with the law. I'm proud of agency efforts to comply, and disappointed that we haven't been able to reflect that on USASpending."

Posting the grant data has proved problematic, Shea said, because, unlike contract data, grant data must be collected from various sources. Agencies are supposed to submit all grant awards to OMB by the 20th of each month, but he said, the data rarely comes in a format suitable for posting online and must be reformatted, which takes time. By contrast, OMB can pull data on contract awards directly from the federal procurement system in a format suitable for immediate posting.

The delays are caused by OMB bypassing current data reporting systems so it can post the grant data quickly, said Adam Hughes, director of federal fiscal policy at OMB Watch. The group's site, FederalSpending.org, downloads grant data collected and published by the Census Bureau. OMB attempts to obtain the data directly from agencies rather than wait for it to be published by Census.

"There hasn't been a robust reporting system for noncontract awards data," Hughes said. "That's what [Shea] is trying to improve on."

Hughes added that his organization has not been critical of OMB because the agency has demonstrated consistent progress in overcoming the challenges the site faces.

OMB also faces a federal funding accountability act deadline to begin posting subgrant and subcontract data on the site by Jan. 1, 2009. That includes grants and contracts awarded by federal agencies to state and local agencies, which then award that money to other groups. Shea said the challenge to meet the deadline is "enormous."

"There's a provision in the law for an extension for some of those [requirements] for another 18 months," he said. "I expect we'll exercise that extension. ... We have to figure out how to get as much of that data as we can as soon as possible."

Hughes said the difficulty in meeting the deadline to post subgrant and subcontract data was no surprise. "We knew when the first law was passed that the subaward reporting would be very difficult. I think that's being realized currently," he said. "That doesn't mean you shouldn't do it, but I think the timelines are a little unrealistic."

The problems with posting data on the site may be compounded by another bill sponsored by Coburn, Obama and Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Tom Carper, D-Del. The 2008 Strengthening Transparency and Accountability in Federal Spending Act, introduced on June 3, expands the requirements of the spending Web site.

The bill, which has been referred to the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, would require agencies to submit requests for proposals and contract information for posting on USASpending.gov to the site, allowing citizens to compare what the government asked for to what it purchased. In addition the bill would require the site to publish performance data on the contract and disclose additional information on the entities that receive federal awards.

"We're hoping the reaction to the new bill won't be 'It's too hard, we shouldn't do it,' " Hughes said. "We're hoping for a dialogue on how we can get this to work. We think this information is valuable and important." OMB Watch helped write both bills.

The bill also would require the site to provide better search capability and to offer data in a machine readable format such as XML. In addition, the bill requires agencies to certify that the entities receiving awards do not owe taxes.

Shea said he hopes OMB publishes the data in a way that allows the public to better track spending and determine if agencies could have spent the money better. "The purpose of sunlight is to cure wrong, and I just don't think the information is being used for that purpose yet," he said.

Asked if the site's visitors could track if agencies were spending money wisely, he replied, "I don't see that happening."

[Comments on this article]

. >All Things Reform Mobile: allthingsreform.mofuse.mobi >Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 (not toll-free) >US House/Senate Mobile: bit.ly/members >Contact your reps tips: bit.ly/dear .

Sphere: Related Content

DOI's Mineral and Mining Service wins "Worst Misconduct Abuse" award

Image via Wikipedia Government reform orgs. deliver news on major events within their areas of expertise.
From: Project on Government Oversight (POGO)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Danielle Brian or Mandy Smithberger, 202-347-1122
POGO: DOI’s Mineral and Mining Service Wins “Worst Misconduct Abuse” Award

Washington, D.C. – The Project On Government Oversight welcomed the news today that federal investigators at the Department of Interior OIG have documented evidence that employees at the Department of Interior’s Minerals Management Service (MMS) have accepted gifts, ski vacations, and sex from industry personnel. The charges illustrate the improper relationship between the regulatory agency and the oil and gas industry that it is tasked with over-seeing. This cozy relationship with the industry has been the subject of several inquiries in recent years.

U.S. Senator Jeff Bingaman, Chairman, Energy and Natural Resources Committee had requested the OIG investigation.

Sources have told POGO that three Department of Interior OIG reports show systemic and reckless abuse at MMS that extends to its leadership, explicitly naming retired Associate Director Lucy Denett as being responsible for contract rigging contract at the agency.

“Given the billions of dollars at stake, and number of people involved, this is easily the worst instance of government misconduct that POGO has seen,” said Danielle Brian, Executive Director of POGO.

The IG’s findings confirm POGO’s earlier reports that Denett rigged a contract to allow a former MMS employee, Jimmy Mayberry, to work as a consultant for MMS. These allegations provide further insight into how MMS has failed its mission to collect royalties owed on federal oil and gas leases on behalf of taxpayers.

For several years, POGO has been monitoring and reporting the department’s gross mismanagement of the Mineral and Mining Services (MMS) office. For more information go to, www.pogo.org.

Founded in 1981, the Project On Government Oversight is an independent nonprofit which investigates and exposes corruption and other misconduct in order to achieve a more accountable federal government.

.
>All Things Reform Mobile: allthingsreform.mofuse.mobi >Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 (not toll-free) >US House/Senate Mobile: bit.ly/members >Contact your reps tips: bit.ly/dear
.

Sphere: Related Content

Tell your two US Senators and US Representative YES to a strong whistleblower protection bill

Public Citizen is asking us to send a message to our respective two US Senators and US Representative in support of government whistleblowers. Last year, strong whistleblower protection bills were passed in both houses of Congress. Now, the Senate and the House have both passed bills by a veto-proof majority, but they must be reconciled- now it's time for Congress to finish the job by passing a final bill; emphasis should go to the House version.

When scientific research is altered or suppressed, government contractors waste millions of taxpayer dollars, or national security documents are falsified, witnesses need to know that they can blow the whistle without reprisals endangering their careers and their lives. Please go to this Public Citizen whistleblower campaign's webpage and send your message to emphasize the House version for strongest whistleblower protection (you can edit the message if you wish). If you prefer to call the Capitol Switchboard, the phone number is 202-224-3121. Thank you

Sphere: Related Content

Consumer Product Safety Commission unresponsive to dangerous and defective company product reports

Public Citizen has released a report on the lax public notifications of product defects by the CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission). This is yet another example of an administration that has politicized its public service. Based upon similar backass services from a host of Executive branch agencies, I must assume that politicization is endemic throughout the system under Bush's watch.

Here is Public Citizen's description of its newest report on consumer product safety issues and the federal government:

U.S. Consumer Protection Officials Wait Months to Notify Public of Dangerous, Defective Products, Public Citizen Study Finds

Despite a law requiring manufacturers to provide the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) with “immediate” notification of dangerous products, the agency typically delays nearly seven months after learning of dangerous, defective products before telling the public. A new Public Citizen study, Hazardous Waits: CPSC Lets Crucial Time Pass Before Warning Public About Dangerous Products, reveals that companies fined for tardy reporting took an average of 993 days – 2.7 years – between learning of a safety defect in their products and notifying the CPSC. Perhaps as shocking, the CPSC then took an average of 209 additional days before disclosing the information to the public – even though each case concerned a product defect so dangerous that the item was recalled.

• Read the press release
• Read the report
• Read a summary of the differences between the House and Senate versions of the Consumer Product Safety Reform/Modernization Act
• Read an in-depth comparison of the House and Senate bill

Sphere: Related Content

$55 billion in improper HHS payments in 2007

According to The Swine Line, the blog of Citizens Against Government Waste, work has begun in Washington to calculate the improper payments made by its various federal agencies:

The GAO just released its most recent report on estimated improper payments made by federal agencies. Overall 2007 estimates for improper payments (overpayments or underpayments, but guess which one is most prevalent?) were $55 billion. The most vulnerable federal program was the Medicaid fee-for-service program, which had an estimated $13 billion in improper payments and that was only for its fee-for-service program and only for six months worth of claims. Government Executive Magazine reports that:

HHS is not the only agency still working to develop improper payment estimates. GAO reported that the fiscal 2007 estimate did not include data from 14 risk-susceptible programs with outlays of $170 billion. Nine of these fall under the Homeland Security Department and were only recently identified as risk-susceptible. GAO considered the identification of programs as an important step toward proper reporting and prevention of improper payments. Twelve of the 14 programs that did not report estimates aim to do so for 2008. The other two did not report target implementation dates.

Sphere: Related Content

Report reveals full history of Department of Homeland Security mismanagement

CREW (Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington) has released a report on the mismanagement of the DHS (Department of Homeland Security) during its first five years of operation. They also created a website devoted to the research project, called Homeland Security for Sale.

The DHS has lost billions of dollars already in its short existence; it can be argued, too, that our domestic security situation in America is not any better than when the department was first established. Hopefully, this report will inspire our Congress to take deep, serious steps to see that the DHS enjoys new, top management resources and practices during this age of illegal immigration and terrorism.

Sphere: Related Content