Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
i agree with you that more aggressive oversight would have been good--but how would you imagine that this program would have been revealed if it was basically off the books that oversight presupposes, typically, are complete?
|
Children playing children games get "do overs". People who accept the highest levels of responsibility, don't get "do overs". The consequences of their actions or inaction often will have dire consequences. Hence, at the Congressional level their are no excuses for failing in their responsibilities for oversight. They either fail or they live up to their responsibility. So, I do not want to hear Congress giving speeches passing the blame for their failures.
In answer to your question, the first thing that has to happen is that a "tone" be set. You go in and act like you own it. You let people know what is expected. You let people know what the consequences will be for them failing to meet expectations. You act accordingly, with no surprises. You ask specific questions, like: are any "programs" in the planing stages related to ...., what are those "programs", how much money has been spent, who is involved, how are you going to decide if the "program" get implimented, etc, etc.,etc,. etc. There are hundreds of specific questions that I whould ask if I had oversight responsibility. In addition, I would not only talk to the director, I would talk to random people - all the way down the chain to the janitor. I would act like I own it.