Posted by
Always To The Right on Thursday, February 19, 2009 11:41:19 AM
Byron York smells a RAT.
Charles Grassley smelled a RAT right before the Senate vote on
Porkulus, but couldn’t get his statement to the floor on time. You’ll
smell a rat, too, when you’re done reading this post, and it won’t just
be the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, either:
You’ve heard a lot about the astonishing spending in the
$787 billion economic stimulus bill, signed into law this week by
President Barack Obama. But you probably haven’t heard about a
provision in the bill that threatens to politicize the way allegations
of fraud and corruption are investigated — or not investigated —
throughout the federal government.
The provision, which attracted virtually no attention in the debate
over the 1,073-page stimulus bill, creates something called the
Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board — the RAT Board, as it’s
known by the few insiders who are aware of it. The board would oversee
the in-house watchdogs, known as inspectors general, whose job is to
independently investigate allegations of wrongdoing at various federal
agencies, without fear of interference by political appointees or the
White House.
In the name of accountability and transparency, Congress has given
the RAT Board the authority to ask “that an inspector general conduct
or refrain from conducting an audit or investigation.” If the inspector
general doesn’t want to follow the wishes of the RAT Board, he’ll have
to write a report explaining his decision to the board, as well as to
the head of his agency (from whom he is supposedly independent) and to
Congress. In the end, a determined inspector general can probably get
his way, but only after jumping through bureaucratic hoops that will
inevitably make him hesitate to go forward.
First, let’s ask ourselves how this stimulates the economy. Why
include this in an emergency stimulus bill when it has nothing to do
with stimulus or economics? This rule change should have come in
separate debate in Congress — like so many other portions of Porkulus.
It does, however, have everything to do with Hope and Change. What
the RAT Board can do, as York points out, is direct or quash
investigations by Inspectors General throughout the federal
bureaucracy. Until now, IGs have had independence of action in order
to avoid charges of politicization (remember that word?) and to conduct
probes without interference from the Department of Justice, the White
House, or Congress. Now they will answer to Congress not on general
performance, but on the specifics of their probes.
How did it get into Porkulus? Grassley says it wasn’t in the
original bill passed in the Senate, and it suddenly appeared in the
conference version. No one has claimed ownership of the RAT Board yet,
but clearly the Democratic majority wants full control over oversight
in the bureaucracy — which more or less means an end to effective
oversight over the majority, which is the entire point of the IG position.
After all, if we could rely on politicians and bureaucrats to police
themselves, we wouldn’t need Constitutional checks and balances at all.
The name of the RAT Board is Orwellian, as is its appearance in the
administration that claimed it would have the most transparency in
American history. Putting IGs under Nancy Pelosi’s thumb eliminates
transparency and accountability, and calling it an Accountability and
Transparency Board is a grim joke. It’s simply a mechanism to shut
down potentially embarrassing (or worse) IG investigations while
commanding others against political foes.
Put simply, it brings the worst aspects of the Chicago Machine to
Washington DC — a result which we repeatedly warned would happen with
Obama’s election.