The House has begun consideration of the #IG Independence and Empowerment Act. The bill would protect our nonpartisan watchdogs from political interference and give them the tools they need to oversee the executive branch.
For example, did you know IGs can't compel former agency employees to cooperate with their investigations? That means someone abusing the powers of government or wasting taxpayer resources can evade accountability by simply taking another job. This bill would fix that.
By now, anyone who paid passing attention to the news in the last year knows that a president can fire these *independent* watchdogs for any reason at all and that the current law doesn't require them to explain that reason to Congress. The potential for abuse here is massive.
Just think about it. What kind of independent oversight will we as taxpayers get if the overseer is worried about pissing off their boss and losing their jobs? Hint: it will not be the best oversight. But don't take my word for it, let's ask @ChuckGrassley grassley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/…
This bill would fix that too, by requiring the president to communicate to Congress documented causes for the IGs removal. Before you reflectively say "HEY THAT'S NOT CONSTITUTIONAL" read this: pogo.org/analysis/2020/…
And read this: everycrsreport.com/reports/R46762…
Looks like @GReschenthaler should read this. Also, the for cause protections would not limit a president's ability to remove an IG who has committed "dereliction of duty," I'm not sure the Congressman is talking about.
In fact, @daniellebrian wrote about this very issue today. The for cause removal protections in HR 2662, the IG Independence and Empowerment Act, would provide the President a way to remove bad IGs while protecting those that are doing their jobs. thehill.com/opinion/white-…
We have reached prime time! @RepMaloney opens the final debate on HR 2662 by quoting from this letter from @CommonCause @GovAcctProj @protctdemocracy @OpenTheGov @Public_Citizen @NatlSecCnslrs @taxpayers @StandUpAmerica @demandprogress @CREWcrew and more: pogo.org/letter/2021/06…
@RepMaloney @CommonCause @GovAcctProj @protctdemocracy @OpenTheGov @Public_Citizen @NatlSecCnslrs @taxpayers @StandUpAmerica @demandprogress @CREWcrew For more on the legislation, here is the testimony I provided in the House earlier this year: pogo.org/testimony/2021…
@RepMaloney @CommonCause @GovAcctProj @protctdemocracy @OpenTheGov @Public_Citizen @NatlSecCnslrs @taxpayers @StandUpAmerica @demandprogress @CREWcrew Seems like we're going to hear a lot of histrionics against protecting *independent* watchdogs from political retaliation. These protections had BROAD bipartisan support in 2007. (vote was: 404-11) Including from many GOP members still in Congress today. clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll9…
It's wild that there is any argument about this. It's so common sense. Here are nonpartisan, former inspectors general warning Congress about the danger to independent oversight if they don't protect current watchdogs from overt obstruction of oversight: pogo.org/letter/2020/05…
Appreciate @JimmyGomezCA pointing out that his language to give IGs authority to subpoena former government employees if their testimony is relevant to the watchdog's investigations into waste, fraud, and abuse of power was originally introduced by Republicans in the 115th Cong.
Taking a break from tweeting to walk this very good and very independent watchdog. Be back soon. 
WAIT! I couldn't let this go unanswered. The way @JamesComer is talking about IGs, it is clear that he does not understand the IG Act. He opposes protecting IGs from political interference because he says presidents deserve to have IGs that agree with them politically. WRONG
The IG Act requires IGs to be apolitical. Explicitly. That is why for cause removal protections are so necessary. A president cannot faithfully execute the law if he is firing an IG for political reasons. They are explicitly, statutorily apolitical. END RANT. time to walk my dog.
Back in time for... votes.
AND IT PASSES! The IG Independence and Empowerment Act (H.R. 2662) is on to the Senate.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
