Inspector General Access Act of 2019

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. FOXX of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 202, the Inspector General Access Act of 2019. Inspectors general perform a critical oversight function with regard to misconduct at their respective agencies. This committee, the Oversight and Reform Committee, has a long history of advocating for IGs to have timely and complete access to all the information they need to fulfill their oversight and investigative functions.

In continuance of that mission, H.R. 202 removes an unnecessary and outdated statutory hurdle that prevents the inspector general from investigating certain misconduct at the Department of Justice, DOJ.

Current law requires the DOJ IG to refer allegations of misconduct by Department attorneys to the Office of Professional Responsibility, or OPR, rather than initiate an investigation himself. The OPR existed prior to the statutory creation of the DOJ IG in 1988. At the time DOJ IG was created, OPR retained the specific authority.

H.R. 202 seeks to harmonize the Department of Justice IG's investigative authority with the rest of the Federal inspectors general who are not similarly restricted. Congress and this committee have consistently supported the need for independent and transparent oversight of Federal agencies and programs. The current bifurcation of investigative authority at DOJ is inconsistent with this committee's history of supporting the notion of an unencumbered IG.

The DOJ IG is not without its own oversight. The IG is confirmed by the Senate, accountable to the public, and is only removable by the President after notification to Congress. Further, the IG has statutory reporting obligations to both agency leadership and Congress.

The OPR, in contrast, lacks such independence from the agency it is obligated to investigate. The director of OPR is selected and appointed by the attorney general, answers to the attorney general, and can be removed or disciplined only by the attorney general. The IG's independence is critical to the value of their work.

Also critical to the value of the IG's work is transparency. The IG maintains transparency by publishing its reports on a public website. The website also contains information about the IG's operations and functions and a full archive of completed and ongoing work. This standard of transparency does not apply to OPR. Adverse findings by OPR against a DOJ lawyer are subject to review by the Department's leadership and can be overruled by the Department's leadership without any transparency.

It is important to note that this division of authority is a unique situation amongst the Federal IG community. The need for this legislation has also been discussed in multiple hearings before the Oversight and Reform Committee and in reports by watchdog groups.

The DOJ IG, Michael Horowitz, testified before the Oversight and Reform Committee on the importance of eliminating this discrepancy. Congress's own watchdog, the Government Accountability Office, has issued reports with recommendations to empower the DOJ IG.

This is a good bill, Madam Speaker, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source