WASHINGTON-House Committee on Oversight and Reform Ranking Member James Comer (R-Ky.) today spoke on the House floor opposing H.R. 2662, the Inspector General Independence and Empowerment Act, expressing concern it could lead to the politicization of offices of inspectors general.
In his statement, Ranking Member Comer outlined the shortfalls of H.R. 2662, which includes the failure to ensure proper protections for former federal employees and maintaining the President’s authority to expeditiously remove and replace inspectors general. Ranking Member Comer raised concerns that the lack of guardrails in the legislation could enable IGs to abuse their positions for political purposes. He concluded by calling on Democrats to improve the bill to ensure inspectors general are focused on and equipped to conduct robust oversight over agency operations and spending.
Below are the remarks as prepared.
Through their work, inspectors general help improve government efficiency and effectiveness.
Their nonpartisan audits and investigations work to root out waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in federal agencies.
In fact, the Oversight Committee and IGs have this common mission.
But IGs occupy a unique spot within the federal government.
They have a responsibility to their respective agency and to Congress through the notice requirements.
When the political parties of the Executive Branch and Congress are different, political fights can understandably erupt.
Unfortunately, this has recently led to a politicization of IG investigations.
That takes us to today’s bill.
Many provisions in this bill are a step in the right direction to empower IGs to conduct robust oversight.
However, I remain concerned about some of the provisions in this bill.
Title I in this bill would unnecessarily constrain the President’s ability to remove an IG, shifting the delicate balance between the Executive Branch and Congress.
Maintaining the current balance would enable Congress to use its own oversight authority if it believes there is wrongdoing by the President or agency head in the removal of an IG.
Next, in Title III, the majority has proposed to dramatically limit who can be appointed as an acting inspector general, if the IG has voluntarily left office or been removed.
In doing so, this hinders the President’s ability to appoint an IG with whom they have confidence.
While there are legitimate concerns about IGs serving at multiple agencies, this provision goes too far in limiting the President’s authority over a subset of Executive Branch employees.
Finally, I have serious concerns with Title V, the provision authorizing an Inspector General to issue testimonial subpoena authorities to compel testimony from former federal employees.
While it may be helpful for IGs to investigate certain allegations of misconduct, it also provides IGs with a tool that can be easily abused for political purposes.
For example, this authority would enable new Biden-appointed Inspectors General to subpoena former Trump Administration officials under the guise of any investigation regardless of the real purpose for the investigation.
Finally, this provision does not provide the necessary protections for former federal employees that may be subjected to the legal fees of dealing with an subpoena, instead forcing them to pay for counsel to defend against and respond to these subpoenas.
Without meaningful protections to ensure that testimonial subpoena authority would not be used to seek out political retribution, I cannot support this provision.
Rooting out waste, fraud, abuse, mismanagement, and misconduct is one of the most important jobs of this Committee and inspectors general serve on the front lines with us in this mission.
We must ensure that all our inspectors general have the tools they need to conduct robust oversight of their respective agencies.
That is why Committee Republicans offered multiple amendments at the markup to address these concerns, but still empower our IGs.
And we again offered compromise amendments at the Rules Committee.
But my Democrat colleagues have only allowed one of these amendments to be made in order. I am hopeful that Democrats will take the opportunity to pass a major bipartisan bill by adopting this amendment.
If they choose to continue down their partisan path, I hope my Democrat colleagues can stop the repeated attacks on the Trump Administration and instead focus on ensuring our inspectors general are focused on and equipped to conduct robust oversight over agency operations and spending.
