By Robert Stacy McCain on 7.14.09 @ 6:08AM
Behind the headlines, IG investigation keeps chugging.
"We're not there yet," one Democratic source on Capitol Hill said
last week, when asked about the prospect for hearings on the
Obama administration's firing of AmeriCorps inspector general
Gerald Walpin. Congressional investigators are still
conducting interviews in the case, so the question of whether to
"pull the trigger" on a full-blown inquiry -- with subpoenas for
witnesses to testify under oath at committee hearings -- has yet
to be decided.
The fact that both Democrats and Republicans are involved in
investigating the Walpin dismissal is, however, highly
significant. With Democrats controlling both houses of Congress,
bipartisanship is absolutely necessary to getting the truth about
the AmeriCorps case, as with the other cases in the smoldering
"IG Gate" scandal.
Sensitive political considerations are involved, given the
potential fallout from investigations into whether the Obama
administration -- which promised to be the most "transparent" in
history -- is trying to muzzle the independent watchdogs tasked
with preventing waste, fraud and abuse in federal agencies.
In the span of barely a week, beginning with the White House's
quit-or-be-fired ultimatum to Walpin on June 10, two other
inspectors general left their posts in what appears to be a
pattern of administration pressure against IGs:
• International Trade Commission IG Judith Gwynne was told June
17 that her contract would not be renewed, shortly after Sen.
Charles Grassley (R-Iowa)
sent a letter to ITC asking about a March incident in which
"certain procurement files were removed forcibly from the
possession of the Inspector General by a Commission employee."
Grassley had also asked questions about the unusual arrangement
in which Gwynne was employed by the ITC on a series of six-month
temporary contracts, a situation scarcely conducive to the IG's
independence of agency authority.
• On June 18, Amtrak IG Fred Wiederhold submitted a 94-page
report, prepared at his request by an outside law firm,
showing that the federally subsidized passenger rail service had,
as Grassley said, "systematically violated the letter and spirit
of the Inspector General Act." Immediately after the Amtrak board
meeting where he presented that report, Wiederhold submitted
notice that he would retire.
Those familiar with the congressional investigation say
Wiederhold has denied being forced out at Amtrak -- personal
considerations were also involved in his decision -- but the
report he submitted June 18 details a pattern of obstruction by
Amtrak's law department.
This department is the bailiwick of Amtrak vice president and
general counsel Eleanor "Eldie" Acheson, who just happens to be a
longtime friend (and Wellesley College roommate) of Hillary
Rodham Clinton. Acheson's deputy general counsel, Jonathan Meyer,
joined Amtrak after spending six years as a top Senate aide to
Joe Biden, who has long proclaimed himself as Amtrak's No. 1
advocate in Washington and who personally announced
the $1.3 billion in "stimulus" funds for Amtrak.
Led by the well-connected Acheson and Meyer, Amtrak's law
department tried to require the IG's office to get prior approval
before communicating with Congress and instituted a policy where
documents subpoenaed by the IG's office were first reviewed and
occasionally redacted by Amtrak management.
None of this squares with the law and Grassley, the congressional
patron saint of inspectors general, wrote in a
letter to Amtrak chairman Thomas Carper that, in the wake of
Wiederhold's retirement, IG staffers were "fearful of
retaliation" if they spoke to congressional
investigators. The seriousness of these charges prompted
Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Oversight
Committee, to join with the committee's ranking Republican,
California Rep. Darrell Issa, in announcing an
official investigation., parallel to the probe led by
Grassley's team in the Senate.
Bipartisan interest in the Amtrak IG case on the House side was
greeted by Republicans on Capitol Hill as a promising sign that
may bode well for prospects that the AmeriCorps IG case will get
a full investigation by the Senate Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs Committee, chaired by Connecticut Sen. Joe
Lieberman.
Lieberman has been officially an independent since losing a 2006
Democratic primary to a left-wing challenger, and he has so far
been noncommittal on the AmeriCorps case. Last month, Lieberman
and the committee's ranking Republican, Maine Sen. Susan Collins,
initially seemed willing to accept the White House's claim that
Walpin had been "disoriented" at a key May 20 meeting with the
board of the Corporation for National and Community Service
(CNCS), which oversees the AmeriCorps program.
However, when accused by the
Washington Times of "punting" the Walpin case,
Lieberman responded that he was "committed to conducting an
independent review to make sure Mr. Walpin's termination was not
arbitrary, capricious, punitive, or political." And the
suspicious circumstances surrounding that termination continue to
be investigated.
Walpin had protested a decision, apparently approved by Obama
administration Justice Department officials, not to prosecute
Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson -- a Democrat and Obama supporter
-- on charges of misusing AmeriCorps funding for Johnson's St.
HOPE Academy charity.
Last week, when congressional investigators asked CNCS general
counsel Frank Trinity about White House involvement in decision
to fire Walpin,
Trinity refused to answer, saying he was "not authorized" to
discuss the subject. One Republican investigator said Democrat
staffers participating in the interview of Trinity "were as upset
as we were" at the CNCS lawyer's refusal to talk about the role
White House counsel Norman Eisen played in Walpin's firing.
A subpoena to testify at a Senate committee hearing would be
necessary to compel full disclosure in the case, which highlights
the sensitive political considerations involved. Democrats are
understandably averse to convening hearings -- which, unlike
background investigations conducted by staffers, are very public
events -- to ask questions about charges of wrongdoing by Obama
administration officials. On the other hand, Democrats also don't
want to be accused of helping cover up wrongdoing.
Meanwhile, the investigations continue, as staffers interview
witnesses and pore over documents in the cases. So far, there is
no clear proof of criminal malfeasance and sources caution
against a media rush to "connect the dots," but IG-Gate keeps
chugging along.
topics:
Inspectors General, Gerald Walpin, Charles Grassley