Congress, Media, Politics

Obama Administration Moves To Sharply Curtail Authority Of Government Watchdogs

President_Barack_Obama600px-US-DeptOfJustice-Seal.svg DOJThe Obama Administration has been accused by public interest groups of being one of the most hostile administration toward whistleblowers since the Nixon Administration. Not only whistleblowers but reporters have been subject to abusive investigations and crackdowns under President Obama. Now, that record has taken an even more dangerous turn. The Justice Department is facing bipartisan criticism after it moved to restrict access of inspectors general to documents needed to ferret out corrupt and abusive practices. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued a controversial 68-page memo that says that the department’s inspector general would be required to get permission from the agencies it is investigating to obtain wire taps, grand jury testimonies, and credit information.

For the record, I have been a long critic of the OLC due to what I have viewed as a significant decline in both the neutrality and quality of work in that office. The office has been wrong on a number of important constitutional questions, including the unconstitutional use of recess appointments by the President. In my view, these opinions were a departure from the tradition of the OLC in offering detached and apolitical analysis.

DOJ Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz has correctly noted that federal law gives his office independent authority and that having to coordinate documents requests from the very agency under investigation is counterintuitive: “I strongly disagree with the OLC opinion. Congress meant what it said when it authorized Inspectors General to independently access ‘all’ documents necessary to conduct effective oversight. … Without such access, our office’s ability to conduct its work will be significantly impaired.”

He is joined in this view by key members of Congress from both parties, including Senators Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Ron Johnson, R-Wis., as well as Reps. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., and John Conyers, D-Mich. As Senator Grassley correctly noted “If the Inspector General deems a document necessary to do his job, then the agency should turn it over immediately.”

The requirement that IGs get permission and access from the subject agency is inimical to the very function of their office and the effectiveness of these offices. When combined with the controversial measures taken against whistleblowers by the Obama Administration, the new policy would allow an Administration far greater power in controlling investigations of its authority and would guarantee notice of potential controversies or scandals within its ranks.

207 thoughts on “Obama Administration Moves To Sharply Curtail Authority Of Government Watchdogs”

  1. So what’s the next step? Does the IG office file a lawsuit? How does this get resolved?

  2. Even the mainstream media have admitted that the Obama Administration is the most hostile to reporters and whistleblowers in recent history. And I agree with Aridog that IGs are a crucial check to abuse of powers.

    But here’s the bottom line. If we do nothing to stop the rise of an imperial presidency, then we get what we deserve. Some like Professor Turley have fought this abuse of power, but many people have just become jaded and complacent. Or they take a “yeah but” approach, judging with political glasses.

    They will rue the day they allowed this to happen, because future presidents will not lay down the powers we’ve allowed to accrue today. We’ve set the precedent.

    We’ve come to the point where Obama and Hillary flout the law, and say, “So what? What are you going to do about it?”

  3. Mr. Pickett my my here you are again. You say Unlike some – I tell it like it is. Warts and all. yet you speak out of ignorance. Then you assert those of us who don’t agree are worhty of your criticism. The topic is IG offices as watchdogs…have you ever in your life been subject to an IG inquiry? Yet you are an expert? A few warts there perhaps? Try finding a topic you actually have some first hand knowledge of for a change.

    1. Aridog: no I haven’t had the pleasure of an IG inquiry. But I know what’s right and wrong, at least most of the time. And if I’m not sure I find out.

      But what I don’t understand is the extremity of vitriolic views expressed in these postings by some bloggers. Thete is a real hatred and intolerance and I have found this surprising and disturbing. But fascinating as well. Especially with respect to the total lack on insight that some bloggers demonstrate. I have to say that this is very surprising and i just wonder whether this is typical of American thinking. If it is it is a big eyeopener. The total inability to arrive at a consensus of opinion is fascinating and it doesn’t bode well for the success of America in the future.

      The freedom of the individual at the expense of the freedom other others seems to be a constant theme. And as long as you yourself are OK nobody else matters. A country can’t exist on these terms, and such intolerance may well foster the breakup of the United States some day, in the same way the Soviet Union broke up.

      What I still don’t understand is why you are all at eachother’s throats; there doesn’t seem to be any factor to unite the Nation. Your President is a political figure who is disliked in principle by half the population. So I find it difficult to understand how the country stays together with so much pent up hatred gushing forth. Maybe the opinions expressed on this blog are not representative. Who knows? I certainly don’t. All I can say is that much of what has been said appears to be very dysfunctional indeed – and this does not seem to be the recipe for success.

      I’m sure you view will be different of course…..

      1. ninianpeckitt – you know more about less than anyone I ever met.

  4. I have endured 2 or 3 DOD IG investigations. They really are impartial. All you have to do is defend your positions with facts and you’re good to go. I and my agency/unit passed all of them. Lack of access to information, without hinderence, defeats the purpose of the IG’s of any agency. They are NOT beholden to any political chief. If you have nothing to hide there is no reason to fear an IG query. If you do…that’s another matter, since I didn’t have to hide anything, it never came up however. My guess is that some IG was getting too close to home for Mr Obama. The IG that prompted his reaction merely read what was handed over to the State Department..no sneaky pete actions were involved. Take away relevant IG powers and you have a dictatorship.

  6. Sally Jarvis,

    That quote was a direct cut-and-paste from Professor Turley’s article – or at least how the article appeared slightly more that an hour ago. No additions were made by me; nor were any changes made by me. Those were Professor Turley’s words verbatim.

    I see that the article now reads differently. And I actually agree with Professor Turley as it now reads (although it is customary to note that post-publication changes were made to an article).

  7. Extremely Important Statement;

    Veterans Today:
    Until such time as American voters wake up from their deep sleep and coma, rise and stand up for America, all presidential candidates and all candidates for Senate and House will always be Israeli candidates and never American candidates

  8. To whom does one give the authority and means to investigate without obtaining warrants and without oversights of typical and traditional sorts? Obama obstructing this authority as it pertains to one department or agency means that he is not doing his job. Obama allowing the same department or agency, or any other department or agency the means to investigate without these traditional restraints, check and balance systems, and oversights, means that he is corrupt. It’s a no win situation. It’s a situation that has been in place throughout every Presidency from the inception of this nation and a situation that comes with any office of authority where the ‘buck stops’, whether one likes it or not.

    In the end you compare and contrast the results under the same office and you get your answer. Compared and contrasted to the empty words of Reagan’s eight years which included and was followed by corruption, a seven year recession, and lots of naps and ‘hubs’, and the eight years of the three stooges, which certainly cannot have been forgotten, Obama may be what ever he is accused of but he kept the ship from sinking, has plotted a course that will take longer than one Presidency, and has done so while being obstructed at every turn regardless of whether or not it was to the advantage of the American people or not, by the Republican party.

    It would be a doctorate thesis to find a time in American history where the opposition such has been held by the Republican party has ever included this much incompetence an ever included so many sorry examples of opposition for opposition’s sake.

  9. Fiver – You have misquoted Professor Turley. He says he has long been a critic of the OLC. He does not add “under the Obama administration” as you suggests. Go back and read his post for what it actually says, not what you wanted it to say.

  11. I’ve never had any confidence in the independence of agency IGs. In my agency, employees transfer back and forth between the agency and the IG’s office. They’ll go over there to get a higher graded position, then come back in a few years for a better position or a management job. It’s a revolving door, so the IG auditors and special agents are never going to step on the toes of agency management because they want to leave open the possibility of rejoining the agency. Also, SCOTUS ruled many years ago in a NASA IG case that agency IGs are not independent of the agencies they serve. I would like to see an entirely independent federal agency house all the IGs. It would create a truly independent IG service, promote efficiency, and hopefully enhance training and professionalism. Right now, some agency IGs are well regarded while others are seen as barely competent or as arms of management.

  17. maybe because it might entail investigation of Congress , contractors,and many of those..including government hangers on……….who rip off taxpayers…like Koch brothers,Exxon-Mobil, etc.

    1. Chief Consort to the Progressive Grand Inquisitor:

      “If the President does it, that means it’s not illegal”.

      I don’t think that’s true. President Nixon was granted a pardon.

  20. It’s almost as if federal law enforcement has something to hide, and they don’t like the idea of having their papers and work searched and second guessed by others. Hmmm….

    All I know is that in the agency where I work, if the IG asks you get it to them by the end of the day. But then again, I’m not a law enforcement agent and therefore “special”.

Comments are closed.