host..just another example of how the Bush administration has perverted the system of oversight and checks and balances.
The DOJ/OSG was intended to replace the Office of Independent Counsel (which was truly independent of the sitting administration) when Congress killed the OIC after the Ken Starr/Whitewater fiasco. Bloch is/was a partisan hack.
But it goes beyond that, Bush has perverted the appointment of Inspectors Generals as well. The IGs, in each executive branch agency, are intended to report to both the agency head and Congress. They are supposed to be non-political appointments, independent of the policies and priorities of the sitting president...career attorneys with skills appropriate for the role of IGs.
Quote:
Politicization of Inspectors General
nspectors General (IGs) are officials within each federal agency who are charged with investigating evidence of waste, fraud, and abuse in the Executive Branch. Over the last 25 years, investigations by IGs have saved taxpayers billions of dollars.
To ensure that IGs are independent and objective, Congress required that they be nonpartisan, specifically directing the President to appoint IGs “without regard to political affiliation.” Congress further provided that IGs should be appointed based “solely on the basis of integrity and demonstrated ability” in areas such as accounting and financial analysis....
...Connections to White House: Over one-third of the IGs appointed by President Bush worked in Republican White Houses prior to their appointments as IGs. In contrast, President Clinton appointed no IGs who had worked in any Democratic White House prior to their appointments.
Other Political Connections: In total, 64% of the IGs appointed by President Bush held some sort of political position, such as a political appointment in a Republican administration or a position with a Republican member of Congress, before their appointments as IGs. Only 22% of the IGs appointed by President Clinton had worked in political positions before their appointments.
Political Campaign Contributions: Over half of the IGs appointed by President Bush had made contributions to his campaign or other Republican candidates. In comparison, only 25% of the IGs appointed by President Clinton had made any federal campaign contributions.
Substantive Audit Experience: Only 18% of the IGs appointed by President Bush had previous audit experience, such as experience in an IG’s office, at the Government Accountability Office, or at a private accounting firm. In contrast, 66% of IGs appointed by President Clinton had audit experience prior to their appointments.
http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=726
full report (pdf)
|
Which might explain why more IGs are under investigation for their own misconduct and/or politicization of the office of IG in many executive branch agencies than any time I can remember....but its like the fox guarding the hen house.
It almost begs for a return of a truly independent Office of Independent Counsel....but I dont want to see any investigator, regardless of the party in power, ever having the freedom to unilaterally expand an investigation and enhance his own position as Ken Starr did.