|
Former Republican lawmakers came together to urge those who are now charged with upholding the authority of the first branch of government to resist efforts to surrender those powers to a president.
From the letter:
"Like us, you have taken an oath of office. You were elected to Congress to carry out the constitutional duties and responsibilities of the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate. You were sent to Congress to be the voice of the people. That is an awesome burden and it may require you to exercise restraint to protect the constitutional model—that which is the root of American exceptionalism—and to keep it from being sacrificed on the altar of expediency.
We who have served where you serve now call on you to honor your oath of office and to protect the Constitution and the responsibilities it vested in Congress."
|
|
|
See coverage of the letter:
|
|
At POGO, we take no position on whether there should be a physical barrier built along our southern border. We do, however, join the many Democrats and Republicans who believe that the President’s emergency declaration is unconstitutional.
|
Financial relationships between U.S. universities and foreign governments raise questions about whether foreign-influence laws are strong enough.
|
From cases where lives hang in the balance to potentially sweeping changes to transparency and anti-fraud rules, these cases will likely have major ramifications.
|
What is mission command? Bruce Gudmundsson and Don Vandergriff, two leading military historians, discuss the origins, implications, and challenges of mission command in today’s military.
|
Attention: We have a new video series!
In our third episode of "This Week at POGO," we cover our latest investigation on foreign influence in American academia, an open letter by former Republican lawmakers urging Congress to stop the national emergency, our analysis on election security, and more.
|
Next Week: Conference on Aerial Surveillance
The Project On Government Oversight in conjunction with the American Association for the Advancement of Science is hosting a free event on March 7, 2019, in Washington, D.C. Panelists at the event will discuss the growing power of aerial surveillance, how we should view it in light of other emerging surveillance technologies and evolving legal standards, how it threatens civil rights and civil liberties, and potential policy responses.
|
POGO in the News
|
|
Representing Texas in Congress was one of the greatest honors of our lives. We remember well taking the oath of office and how awesome felt the responsibility to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. It burned within us every day we served in the U.S. Congress, and it still does.
Those now in office are now entrusted with that same duty, and they are being called to act to uphold that responsibility. Earlier this month, President Trump issued a declaration of national emergency in order to obtain funding for a wall on our southern border. Americans may have different views on President Trump’s wall proposal, but all of us should be able to agree that an emergency declaration is a constitutionally inappropriate means to secure funding. In order to fulfill their oath of office Members of Congress should vote to terminate the emergency declaration.
Although Republicans are naturally inclined to stand with their president, it is Republicans who should be most worried about the emergency declaration. That is why we have joined together with two dozen other Republican former members of Congress to urge Republicans now in the House of Representatives and Senate to vote to end the emergency declaration.
Together, we wrote, “It has always been a Republican fundamental principle that no matter how strong our policy preferences, no matter how deep our loyalties to presidents or party leaders, in order to remain a constitutional republic we must act within the borders of the Constitution. Our oath is to put the country and its Constitution above everything, including party politics or loyalty to a president.”
|
|
|
|
|
More than 25 former Republican lawmakers and nearly 60 former senior national security officials appealed to Congress on Monday to kill President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency on the Mexican border, countering Republican leaders’ effort to hold down defections Tuesday on a scheduled House vote to block the president.
“It has always been a Republican fundamental principle that no matter how strong our policy preferences, no matter how deep our loyalties to presidents or party leaders, in order to remain a constitutional republic we must act within the borders of the Constitution,” wrote the former members of Congress, including Senators John Danforth, Chuck Hagel, Olympia J. Snowe and Richard Lugar, who implored Republicans to protect Congress’s constitutionally mandated power of the purse.
|
|
|
|
|
As the House vote approaches, Trump is facing fresh backlash from fellow Republicans.
A group of 23 former Republican members of Congress has written a letter urging a termination of the emergency declaration.
The letter argues that Trump is encroaching on Congress’s “power of the purse” and urges current lawmakers to stand up for its constitutional powers.
We who have served where you serve now call on you to honor your oath of office and to protect the Constitution and the responsibilities it vested in Congress,” says the letter.
Its signatories include former senators John Danforth (Mo.), Chuck Hagel (Neb.), Gordon Humphrey (N.H.), Richard Lugar (Ind.), Olympia Snowe (Maine) and 18 former House members.
|
|
|
|
|
In addition, 28 Republican former House members and senators, many of them from the party's shrinking moderate wing, wrote an open letter declaring their opposition to Trump's emergency declaration.
"How much are you willing to undermine both the Constitution and the Congress in order to advance a policy outcome that by all other legitimate means is not achievable?" wrote the former GOP lawmakers, among them former Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., once the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Grazier, a defense analyst with the Project on Government Oversight, said Haley's nomination "seems a bit curious" given her lack of aerospace experience.
"The practice of government employees trading on their public service to secure high-paying positions at the top levels of government contracting firms has been long established and it sets up all kinds of potential conflicts of interest," Grazier said.
|
|
|
|
|
For Boeing, a government contractor that benefits from billions of dollars every year in U.S. military supply contracts, Haley’s board appointment is the latest example of the company’s close ties to government. Acting defense secretary Patrick Shanahan is a former senior vice president in Boeing’s commercial division. And the company has long been a favored landing place for outgoing government officials; the watchdog group Project on Government Oversight reported late last year that Boeing had hired 19 former high-level military officials.
|
|
|
|
|
Mandy Smithberger, a whistleblower advocate with the Project On Government Oversight, a government watchdog gropu, says the mass exonerations send a terrible signal to those who might consider disclosing wrongdoing.
"The message that's sent is that the first priority is to protect the institution, not to ensure accountability for wrongdoing," Smithberger says.
|
|
|
|
|
Opposition to the national emergency was also expressed Monday in a letter signed by 26 former Republican lawmakers. The open letter, subtitled "Honor Your Oath and Protect the Constitution," was published on the Project On Government Oversight watchdog's website.
|
|
|
|
|
More than two dozen former Republican lawmakers have joined together to call on current GOP representatives in Congress to terminate President Donald Trump’s declaration of a national emergency to pay for his promised U.S.-Mexico border wall.
Some 26 previous GOP members of Congress penned an open letter — subtitled “Honor Your Oath and Protect the Constitution” — which was published on the Project On Government Oversight watchdog’s website on Monday.
The missive states that the oath they made “to put the country and its Constitution above everything, including party politics or loyalty to a president” still “burns within us.”
“That is why we are coming together to urge those of you who are now charged with upholding the authority of the first branch of government to resist efforts to surrender those powers to a president,” it adds.
It sets out two arguments “against allowing a president — any president, regardless of party — to circumvent congressional authority.”
And it ends with a plea:
We who have served where you serve now call on you to honor your oath of office and to protect the Constitution and the responsibilities it vested in Congress. We ask that you pass a joint resolution terminating the emergency declared by the President on February 15, 2019.
Read the full letter here, signed by Steve Bartlett, Douglas Bereuter, Sherwood Boehlert, Rodney Chandler, William Clinger Jr., Tom Coleman, John Danforth, Mickey Edwards, David F. Emery, Chuck Hagel, Gordon Humphrey, Nancy Johnson, James Kolbe, James Leach, John LeBoutillier, Richard Lugar, Pete McCloskey, John R. McKernan, Jr., Thomas Petri, Claudine Schneider, John J.H. Schwarz, MD, Christopher Shays, Peter Smith, Olympia Snowe , Alan Steelman and Peter G. Torkildsen. |
|
|
|
|
Dan Grazier, a military fellow with the Project on Government Oversight, said any new classification system would need to ensure those smaller incidents — which former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis called “leading indicators” at a hearing last year following Military Times’ investigation into the sharp rise in aviation accidents — don’t get lost.
“There are obviously issues with those mishaps that go beyond just the financial,” Grazier said, and raising the bar on what gets reported as a major mishap could mean that small symptoms of potentially larger, systemic problems “won’t receive as much attention.”
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Grazier, a military fellow with the Project on Government Oversight, said any new classification system would need to ensure those smaller incidents — which former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis called “leading indicators” at a hearing last year following Military Times’ investigation into the sharp rise in aviation accidents — don’t get lost.
“There are obviously issues with those mishaps that go beyond just the financial,” Grazier said, and raising the bar on what gets reported as a major mishap could mean that small symptoms of potentially larger, systemic problems “won’t receive as much attention.”
|
|
|
|
|
Democrats have ramped up oversight of President Donald Trump and his administration with hearings this week on Trump's finances, the Russia inquiry, the immigrant child separation policy and more. But holding hearings and asking questions is only the first step in successful oversight, says Justin Rood, director of the Congressional Oversight Initiative at the Project on Government Oversight and a former staff investigator for Oklahoma GOP Sen. Tom Coburn. Congressional overseers must then grapple with their targets to make sure they cooperate, or cultivate whistleblowers who will provide information outside the standard channels.
Listen to the podcast |
|
|
|
|
Environmental and transparency advocates were highly critical. The Project on Government Oversight in January had faulted Wheeler for having held a 2017 fundraiser for Barrasso, who presided over his confirmation. “Despite President Trump’s campaign pledge to 'drain the swamp,' his administration hasn’t heralded any major changes to slow the revolving door between government and special interests—if anything, the administration has opened the door much wider than the previous administration for lobbyists to become top political appointees,” POGO wrote in a Jan. 15 research article. “Meanwhile, lobbyists continue to buy influence with lawmakers through political donations. With Wheeler, both of these long-criticized ways of the swamp come together in one nomination.”
|
|
|
|
|
This week we both joined two dozen fellow former Republican lawmakers calling on our colleagues in Washington to preserve our system of checks and balances and repeal that declaration. Our reasoning is straightforward: If we are silent when a president unilaterally exerts executive power to achieve a policy goal — even if we were to agree with him on substance — we are opening the door for future presidents, with whom we may strongly disagree, to do the same.
As our open letter reads:
"As Republican members of Congress, each of us started with one central understanding of our party’s overarching commitment: to honor our pledge to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. After each election, when our constituents granted us the privilege to again represent them in Congress, we renewed that pledge. It has always been a Republican fundamental principle that no matter how strong our policy preferences, no matter how deep our loyalties to presidents or party leaders, in order to remain a constitutional republic we must act within the borders of the Constitution. Our oath is to put the country and its Constitution above everything, including party politics or loyalty to a president.
"We who have signed this letter are no longer members of Congress but that oath still burns within us. That is why we are coming together to urge those of you who are now charged with upholding the authority of the first branch of government to resist efforts to surrender those powers to a president. ...
"There is no way around this difficulty: what powers are ceded to a president whose policies you support may also be used by presidents whose policies you abhor.
"Like us, you have taken an oath of office. You were elected to Congress to carry out the constitutional duties and responsibilities of the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate. You were sent to Congress to be the voice of the people. That is an awesome burden and it may require you to exercise restraint to protect the constitutional model — that which is the root of American exceptionalism — and to keep it from being sacrificed on the altar of expediency.
"We who have served where you serve now call on you to honor your oath of office and to protect the Constitution and the responsibilities it vested in Congress. We ask that you pass a joint resolution terminating the emergency declared by the president on Feb. 15, 2019."
We call on the Missouri delegation to honor Republican principles and repeal the ill-advised emergency declaration.
|
|
|
|
|
Congressional Research Service
|
|
Scott Amey, General Counsel of the Project on Government Oversight, cautioned: "We have to seriously consider how we are using [OTs]; whether we are using them as intended, whether we are getting the goods and services that we really want and need, whether we are getting them at the best cost and process, and we are using this procurement vehicle as a way to just circumvent the rules and have contractors not have the administration and oversight they need to hold them accountable. I’m just afraid this is going to result in a lot of waste, fraud, and abuse in the future.”
|
|
|
|
|
Project on Government Oversight (POGO) recently wrote about the inability of the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) to complete an independent audit for the second straight year. The government watchdog pointed out that DLA handles more taxpayer money annually ($35 billion) than a number of Cabinet-level departments.
[...] The newsletter also notes – as Williams did in 2017 – that a disclaimer of opinion is “neither a positive nor a negative opinion,” but POGO wasn’t buying that spin.
“The fact that the Agency’s financial controls are so full of holes that auditors couldn’t finish their review is clearly not a success,” the watchdog wrote. “The fact that it happened a second time because the Agency failed to complete or implement Corrective Action Plans also clearly goes into the ‘negative’ column, even if improvements have been made.”
|
|
|
|
|
Lockheed Martin has also mastered the use of the revolving door – the movement of officials back and forth between the Pentagon, the military, and private contractors that gives it a leg up in the race for government largesse. According to a new report and database created by the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), in 2018 alone the company hired 55 former senior government officials as executives, directors, or lobbyists. It also has former lobbyists, consultants, and executives serving in the Trump administration, including Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson and John Rood, undersecretary for policy at the Pentagon. In short, when it comes to pushing its interests in Washington, Lockheed Martin is wired.
|
|
|
|
|
On Feb. 25, the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) published an open letter to current Republican members of Congress signed by 26 of their predecessors. In the wake of President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency, the letter makes two arguments grounded in the duty of members to uphold their oath of office, to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States.” The 26 former members—all Republican—call on current members to realize that this moment transcends party politics.
“To you, we ask this question: what will you do when a president of another party uses the precedent you are establishing to impose policies to which you are unalterably opposed? There is no way around this difficulty: what powers are ceded to a president whose policies you support may also be used by presidents whose policies you abhor.”
Congressmen on both sides of the aisle and in both chambers should continue considering measures to reassert Congress’ powers as the First Branch, and act with firm authority in defense of Article I of the U.S. Constitution, which established Congress as the font of all federal authority.
The full letter can be read here. |
|
|
|
|
Center for American Progress
|
|
Compliance with FARA is very low. The U.S. Department of Justice’s stated policy of “voluntary compliance” allows for situations such as those involving Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn, who retroactively registered after they had served in extremely sensitive positions in a national campaign and in the White House—in Flynn’s case, as national security adviser [according to the work of Lydia Dennett at the Project On Government Oversight].
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Amey, general counsel at the Project on Government Oversight in Washington, said Cohen came off as a truthful witness.
“Everyone is going to hear this testimony and realize that Mr. Cohen has a very checkered past, has lied to the IRS, and to state and local officials in New York,” Amey said. “But that doesn’t mean once a liar always a liar. At some point Cohen decided to turn things around and start telling the truth. He seems to be trying to provide truthful statements to the committee.”
|
|
|
|
|
Jim Kolbe, a Republican who represented the Tucson area for 22 years in the U.S. House, was among 25 former Republican lawmakers who signed an open letter asking current GOP representatives to “put the country and its Constitution above everything, including party politics or loyalty to a president.”
The letter, posted by the watchdog group Project On Government Oversight, comes as House leadership plans to vote Tuesday on a resolution that would terminate Trump’s emergency declaration, which he intends to use to circumvent Congress to secure billions of dollars to fund a wall along the southern U.S. border. In 2015 and 2016, Trump promised repeatedly on the campaign trail that Mexico would pay for the structure.
The letter warns current lawmakers that the president is taking the power of the purse out of their hands: “If you allow a president to ignore Congress, it will be not your authority but that of your constituents that is deprived of the protections of true representative government.”
It also cautions that Trump’s move would set a troubling precedent.
“To you, we ask this question: what will you do when a president of another party uses the precedent you are establishing to impose policies to which you are unalterably opposed?” the authors wrote.
|
|
|
|
|
During the first two years of the Trump administration, the Department of Defense has curtailed the release of public information about its spending and operations overseas, as reporters have complained of declining access to senior leaders. In an interview with WPR, Mandy Smithberger, director of the Center for Defense Information at the Project on Government Oversight, explains how increasing secrecy at the Pentagon undermines democratic accountability and impairs national security policy.
World Politics Review: How do the Defense Department’s transparency and reporting practices under President Trump compare with those of previous administrations?
POGO's Mandy Smithberger: Each administration seems to increase secrecy, partly as a result of efforts that have little to do with who is in the White House. For example, the Pentagon has unsuccessfully tried for several years to exempt itself from provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. But the Trump administration is setting a new low in this regard. Soon after taking office, then-Defense Secretary James Mattis rolled back public access to basic information about American wars, such as the number of troops deployed overseas. This change in policy has no apparent benefit other than to pursue secrecy for the sake of secrecy. The Trump administration has also moved to withhold information on airstrikes in Afghanistan and issued new guidance designed to obfuscate spending information. In a disturbing sign of what is yet to come, Trump last month urged acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan to withhold government watchdog reports from the public. The Pentagon has also constrained interactions with the press, particularly avoiding on-camera briefings.
This emphasis on increased secrecy makes it more difficult to identify and fix serious problems. Ideally, anyone with concerns about wasteful spending or abuse of power would be able to address the matter internally, by going up the chain of command. But in reality, various obstacles stand in the way of that process, and sometimes the only recourse for shining a light on these problems is to go to Congress or the press. If the press cannot ask questions and draw attention to urgent issues, especially when government officials are not comfortable going to their superiors, those problems will continue to undermine U.S. security and safety.
WPR: What are the implications of the Pentagon’s lack of transparency for national security policy and the decision-making process, as well as for democratic accountability?
Smithberger: An informed and engaged citizenry is a bedrock principle of American democracy. Unnecessary secrecy undermines democratic accountability and impairs national security policy. As the National Archives’ Information Security Oversight Office pointed out in its most recent annual report, “Too much classification impedes the proper sharing of information necessary to respond to security threats, while too little declassification undermines the trust of American people in their Government.” That report found that in 2017, original classification decisions increased by 49 percent, while formal challenges to classification decisions declined by 24 percent.
This administration is presiding over an unprecedented increase in military spending—and asking for even more—while providing less information about how that money is actually being spent. The most troubling area for secrecy is around information to assess current American wars, such as the number of troops deployed overseas and details on airstrikes conducted in foreign countries. If Americans are asking their military to go into harm’s way on their behalf, the public has a right to know whether the blood and treasure are worth it. We can’t have a meaningful debate about America’s endless wars if the civilian population is in the dark about what they entail. Polls have shown that veterans, who know firsthand the costs of war, support the United States withdrawing from Afghanistan at a greater margin than the general population.
Far too often, we see the classification system abused in order to conceal embarrassing information. When the system is abused, it can impede the sharing of information within the government and raise questions about the protection of legitimate secrets. Keeping Americans safe is important and requires more democratic accountability, not less.
WPR: What are some key steps that the next secretary of defense can take to reverse the apparent backsliding on transparency at the Pentagon?
Smithberger: The next secretary of defense can set the tone by making clear that there should be a presumption of openness when it comes to the Pentagon’s operations. Information that can be released to the public should be, including routine data on cost, official schedules, and performance reports on weapon systems. These reports were previously available, but have now been stamped, “For Official Use Only.”
The ballooning classification system costs billions of dollars annually, and is unsustainable. Truly sensitive information should be protected, but information that allows the public to assess U.S. wars, the effectiveness of weapons, and other major spending efforts should be released as much as possible. Pentagon leadership can also set a positive tone by being responsive to the press and to requests from the public for information.
There are also steps that other branches of government can take. Congress should pass, and the defense secretary should support, legislation adding factors like cost, value of the information, and potential public benefit to the criteria used when making decisions regarding classification. Those criteria should also apply to weighing the punishment for individuals who release classified or sensitive information.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Comments
Post a Comment